Validation of a home safety questionnaire used in a series of case-control studies

Abstract

ObjectiveTo measure the validity of safety behaviours, safety equipment use and hazards reported on a questionnaire by parents/carers with children aged under 5 years participating in a series of home safety case-control studies.MethodsThe questionnaire measured safety behaviours, safety equipment use and hazards being used as exposures in five case-control studies. Responses to questions were compared with observations made during a home visit. The researchers making observations were blind to questionnaire responses.ResultsIn total, 162 families participated in the study. Overall agreement between reported and observed values of the safety practices ranged from 48.5% to 97.3%. Only 3 safety practices (stair gate at the top of stairs, stair gate at the bottom of stairs, stairs are carpeted) had substantial agreement based on the κ statistic (k=0.65, 0.72, 0.74, respectively). Sensitivity was high (≥70%) for 19 of the 30 safety practices, and specificity was high (≥70%) for 20 of the 30 practices. Overall for 24 safety practices, a higher proportion of respondents over-reported than under-reported safe practice (negative predictive value>positive predictive value). For six safety practices, a higher proportion of respondents under-reported than over-reported safe practice (negative predictive value<positive predictive value).ConclusionsThis study found that the validity of self-reports varied with safety practice. Questions with a high specificity will be useful for practitioners for identifying households who may benefit from home safety interventions and will be useful for researchers as measures of exposures or outcomes.

Risk and protective factors for falls on one level in young children: multicentre case–control study

“…14 Participants were asked to take part in a home safety study and not informed that the purpose of the home visit was to validate their previously completed questionnaire.…”

Poison prevention practices and medically attended poisoning in young children: multicentre case–control study

“…In the validation study,28 only three poisoning exposures had at least moderate agreement (medicines kept in fridge (kappa=0.54), all household products stored at adult eye level or above (kappa=0.48) and having a kitchen safety gate (kappa=0.57)), and sensitivity and specificity were both ≥70% only for three exposures (all household products stored out of reach, all medicines and household products stored out of reach and use of kitchen safety gates). These relatively low levels of agreement may have resulted from parents reporting ‘socially acceptable’ responses, or changing prevention practices after their child's injury, after completing the study questionnaire or in anticipation of the home visit.…”

Improving Smoke Alarm Self-Report Via a Prompted Questionnaire

“…Over reporting may occur because repondents do not consider all levels of the home and because they may be unaware of indicators of alarm functionality (Hat eld et al 2006) While observed data may be the recognized gold standard, direct observations may not be feasible from a resource or time perspective. Self reported smoke alarm information is still useful (Stepnitz et al 2012) but data quality could potentially be improved by asking questions in a manner which causes respondents to think more deliberately about their homes and actions (Chen et al 2003;Watson et al 2014) The goal of the research presented here is to compare two self-reported measurement options to determine how to enhance the accurate reporting of the presence and functionality of smoke alarms. As part of a larger study on child home safety, we compared a Brief Form and an Extended Form of questions about smoke alarm status.…”