z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Validity of Self-Report of Fractures: Results from a Prospective Study in Men and Women Across Europe
Author(s) -
Abbas Ismail,
Terence W O’Neill,
W. Cockerill,
Joseph D. Finn,
Jorge B. CannataAndía,
K Hoszowski,
Olof Johnell,
Christine Matthis,
Heiner Raspe,
Angelica Raspe,
J. Reeve,
Alan J. Silman
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
osteoporosis international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.28
H-Index - 170
eISSN - 1433-2965
pISSN - 0937-941X
DOI - 10.1007/s001980050288
Subject(s) - medicine , false positive paradox , osteoporosis , forearm , medical record , population , prospective cohort study , physical therapy , surgery , machine learning , computer science , environmental health
In population-based studies of osteoporosis, ascertainment of fractures is typically based on self-report, with subsequent verification by medical records. The aim of this analysis was to assess the validity of self-report of incident nonspine fractures using a postal questionnaire. The degree of overreporting of fracture (false positives) was assessed by comparing self-reports of new fracture from respondents in the multicenter European Prospective Osteoporosis Study with data from other sources including radiographs and medical records. In the analysis, 563 subjects reported nonspine fractures. Verification of the presence of fracture was possible in 510 subjects. Of these, fractures were not confirmed in 11% (false positives). The percentage of false positives was greater in men than in women (15% vs 9%, p = 0.04), and less for fractures of the distal forearm and hip than for fractures at other sites. In a separate study, the degree of underreporting (false negatives) was assessed by follow-up of 251 individuals with confirmed fracture ascertained from the records of fracture clinics in three European centers (Lubeck, Oviedo, Warsaw). Questionnaire responses were received from 174 (69%) subjects. Of these, 12 (7%) did not recall sustaining a fracture (false negatives). The percentage of false negatives was lower for hip and distal forearm fractures with only 3 of 90 (3%) such fractures not recalled. Using the combined data from both studies, of those who reported a 'date' of fracture on the questionnaire, 91% of subjects were correct to within 1 month of the actual date of the fracture. A postal questionnaire is a relatively simple and accurate method for obtaining information about the occurrence of hip and distal forearm fractures, including their timing. Accuracy of ascertainment of fractures at other sites is less good and where possible self-reported fractures at such sites should be verified from other sources.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom