Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price
Add to Cart Paperback9 pages Free

Previous research evaluating quality of health interview survey data has generally relied upon comparisons of household interview data with medical records or other external sources of information. However, "gold standards" are not always satisfactory or available. This paper illustrates an alternative approach to the evaluation of data quality-examination of the reliability of reports of chronic conditions in longitudinal surveys. The data come from national samples of older Americans (First National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Epidemiologic Followup Study, 1971-1975, 1982-1984, 1986) and older Taiwanese (Survey of Health and Living Status of the Elderly, 1989, 1993, 1996). The results show that, among respondents who reported a chronic condition at a given interview, the likelihood that the condition was acknowledged at the subsequent interview was higher for hypertension and diabetes than for arthritis and stroke. Low levels of consistency for stroke appear to result partly from the poor wording of questions. In Taiwan, younger, more educated persons and those experiencing severe conditions were somewhat more likely to acknowledge the condition at follow-up compared with their respective counterparts. Women and persons of high cognitive status in the United States and respondents in both countries who used a proxy to report the occurrence of a stroke were also more likely to acknowledge conditions at follow-up. KEYWORDS: chronic disease; data collection; health surveys; questionnaires; reproducibility of results; research design; retrospective studies

Originally published in: American Journal of Epidemiology, v. 151, no. 3, 2000, pp. 315-323.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Reprint series. The Reprint was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1992 to 2011 that represented previously published journal articles, book chapters, and reports with the permission of the publisher. RAND reprints were formally reviewed in accordance with the publisher's editorial policy and compliant with RAND's rigorous quality assurance standards for quality and objectivity. For select current RAND journal articles, see External Publications.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.