2001
DOI: 10.1097/00007435-200106000-00005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fleeting Foreskins: The Misclassification of Male Circumcision Status

Abstract: This is one study among a small number of studies examining the reproducibility of clinician-reported circumcision status by comparing multiple clinical examinations of the same patient. The magnitude of the misclassification discovered could bias results and indicates the need for greater accuracy in reporting circumcision status in future studies.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although uncommon, misclassification by clinicians has been previously reported 10. We feel this possibility is unlikely given the training our male study nurse received.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Although uncommon, misclassification by clinicians has been previously reported 10. We feel this possibility is unlikely given the training our male study nurse received.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…This result, however, may be explained by the fact that a clinical officer who joined the study in rural Zambia was more inclined to classify men as partially circumcised (15 of the 22 partial MCs are attributable to this clinician). Although it is not possible to confirm whether the designation by the clinical officer was in error, differential classification of circumcision status among clinicians is not uncommon [8], [26]. These cases were removed from subsequent analysis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7,8 These findings underscore the necessity of using a standardized clinical examination for establishing circumcision status for the purpose of research on circumcision. It also highlights the potential difficulty of advising on care of the circumcised and uncircumcised penis when an individual and/or clinician may not know which condition is present.…”
Section: Nhanesmentioning
confidence: 91%