Reliability and validity of a global question on self-reported chronic morbidity
- 205 Downloads
A global question on chronic morbidity is included in many national health interview surveys. According to a recent EU Commission regulation, information on this item should be collected in all EU member states. However, little is known about the reliability and validity of such a question.
Subject and methods
The reliability of a global question on chronic morbidity was investigated among persons who participated in 2001 in both the Belgian health interview survey (HIS) and the national population census (n = 2,871) by using kappa statistics and logistic regression. In addition, data from the HIS 2001 and 2004 (n = 21,376) were used to study estimates and determinants of the sensitivity of this global chronic morbidity measure among people with specific chronic diseases.
In terms of reliability, the kappa statistic showed only moderate agreement (0.559; 95 % CI 0.523–0.594). Additionally, the sensitivity of the global question on chronic morbidity ranged from 49.9 to 87.2 %, depending on the type of disease. A much higher sensitivity was observed among people who rated their health status to be moderate to bad (adjusted OR 3.85; 95 % CI 3.17–4.69).
Self-reported chronic morbidity, measured by a single and global question, is a reasonably reliable instrument to measure ill health. The global instrument provides useful information on the burden of disease, because it takes into account the relevance of the diseases for the people themselves.
KeywordsChronic disease Validity Reliability Health interview survey
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Bombak AE, Bruce SG (2012) Self-rated health and ethnicity: focus on indigenous populations. Int J Circumpolar Health 71. doi: 10.3402/ijch.v71i0.18538
- Burata V, Frova L, Gargiulo L, Gianicolo E, Prati S, Quattrociocchi L (2003) Development of a common instrument for chronic physical conditions. In: Nossikov A, Gudex C (eds) Development of common instruments for health surveys. Ios Press, Amsterdam, pp 21–34Google Scholar
- de Bruin A, Picavet HS, Nossikov A (1996) Health Interview Surveys: towards international harmonization of methods and instruments. World Health Organisation, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
- Goldberg D, Williams P (1988) A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. NFER-NELSON, BerkshireGoogle Scholar
- Groves R, Fowler F, Couper M, Lepkowski J, Singer E, Tourangeau R (2004) Survey methodology. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
- Jagger C, Robine JM, Van Oyen H, Cambois E (2008) Life expectancy with chronic morbidity. In: Giampaoli S, Van Oyen H, Devillé W, Verschuuren M (eds) Major and chronic diseases report 2007. European Commission, Luxemburg, pp 292–304Google Scholar
- McDowell I, Newell C (1996) Measuring health. A guide to rating scales and questionnaires. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Robine JM, Jagger C, Romieu I (2002) Selection of a coherent set of health indicators for the European Union. Phase II: final report, Euro-RevesGoogle Scholar
- Verschuuren M, Gissler M, Kilpelainen K, Tuomi-Nikula A, Sihvonen AP, Thelen J, Gaidelyte R, Ghirini S, Kirsch N, Prochorskas R, Scafato E, Kramers P, Aromaa A (2013) Public health indicators for the EU: the joint action for ECHIM (European Community Health Indicators & Monitoring). Arch Public Health 71(1):12. doi: 10.1186/0778-7367-71-12 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar