Is there an agreement between self-reported medical diagnosis in the CARTaGENE cohort and the Québec administrative health databases?

Abstract

BackgroundPopulation health studies often use existing databases that are not necessarily constituted for research purposes. The question arises as to whether different data sources such as in administrative health data (AHD) and self-report questionnaires are equivalent and lead to similar information.
 ObjectivesThe main objective of this study was to assess the level of agreement between self-reported medical conditions and medical diagnosis captured in AHD. A secondary objective was to identify predictors of agreement among medical conditions between the two data sources. Therefore, the purposes of the study were to explore the extent to which these two methods of commonly used public health data collection provide concordant records and identify the main predictors of statistical variations.
 MethodsData was extracted from CARTaGENE, a population-based cohort study in Québec, Canada, which was linked to the provincial health insurance records of the same individuals, namely the MED-ÉCHO database from the Régie de l’assurance maladie du Québec (RAMQ) and the fee-for-service billing records provided by the physician, for the time period 1998-2012. Agreement statistics (kappa coefficient) along with sensitivity, specificity and predictive positive value were calculated for 19 chronic conditions and 12 types of cancers. Logistic regressions were used to identify predictors of concordance between self-report and AHD from significant covariates (sex, age groups, education, region, income, heavy utilization of health care system and Charlson comorbidity index).
 ResultsAgreement between self-reported data and AHD across diseases ranged from kappa of 0.09 for chronic renal failure to 0.86 for type 2 diabetes. Sensitivity of self-reported data was higher than 50% for 14 out of the 31 medical conditions studied, especially for myocardial infarction (88.62%), breast cancer (86.28%), and diabetes (85.06%). Specificity was generally high with a minimum value of 89.70%. Lower concordance between data sources was observed for higher frequency of health care utilization and higher comorbidity scores.
 DiscussionOverall, there was moderate agreement between the two data sources but important variations were found depending on the type of disease. This suggests that CARTaGENE’s participants were generally able to correctly identify the kind of diseases they suffer from, with some exceptions. These results may help researchers choose adequate data sources according to specific study objectives. These results also suggest that Québec’s AHD seem to underestimate the prevalence of some chronic conditions, which might result in inaccurate estimates of morbidity with consequences for public health surveillance.

Associations of Osteoarthritis with Prevalence and Incidence of Cardiovascular Disease over 10 Years in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: The Sydney Memory and Ageing Study

“…Our study has limitations. Data on self-reported doctor-diagnosed OA and CVD were collected by interview, which might be subject to some bias and most likely result in an underestimation of the prevalence of these conditions and misclassification [27][28][29][30] which would most likely to be nondifferential and thus underestimate the strength of the associations. The loss to follow-up over 10 years may introduce selection bias, where participants completed follow-up were younger, less likely to be females, and had higher levels of physical activity compared with those who did not.…”

Increased Breast and Colorectal Cancer Risk in Type 2 Diabetes: Awareness Among Adults With and Without Diabetes and Information Provision on Diabetes Websites

“…This research inevitably has some limitations. Notably, T2DM status was self-reported, though research shows substantial agreement between self-report and medical-record data for diabetes [ 64 , 65 ], and in both phases of study 1 the proportion of people with T2DM (8.6% and 9.4% respectively, of survey respondents asked about T2DM-status) corresponds with available British T2DM prevalence by age figures [ 2 , 66 ]. We acknowledge that the survey methodology, though highly inclusive in not requiring written or digital literacy, still excluded some minority groups (e.g., British-resident non-English speakers; people without a telephone).…”

Estimating prevalence of child and youth mental disorder and mental health-related service contacts: a comparison of survey data and linked administrative health data

“…This has implications for users of both survey and administrative data who have objectives related to examining between-group differences. Unlike previous studies comparing administrative data to survey self-report (Muggah et al ., 2013 ; Payette et al ., 2020 ), survey-based disorder classifications are based on a validated, interviewer-administered, standardised diagnostic interview that has demonstrated validity and reliability in general population samples of children/youth. Prevalence estimates produced are consistent with estimates from studies elsewhere (Georgiades et al ., 2019 ).…”