Advertisement

Pharmacy World and Science

, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp 50–54 | Cite as

Validity of questions in the use of specific drug-groups in health surveys

  • Kari Furu
  • Dag S. Thelle
Article

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate whether morbidity in the general population could be assessed by questions on drug use in the Norwegian Health Survey 1995. Material and method: A sample of 6,702 persons, aged 20‐79 years was interviewed in their homes using computer‐assisted personal interviewing (CAPI).Mean outcome measure: The validity of questions on use of analgesics and drugs against dyspepsia/peptic ulcer has been assessed according to categories of self‐evaluated health. Results: There was a difference between sporadic and daily users of the drugs to what extent they rated their health as poor. The validity of the drug questions assessed by sensitivity and specificity, showed that only using a dichotomous outcome variable, is too low to give a sufficiently valid measure of the morbidity in the population. Conclusions: Using "yes" or "no" as the only outcome of drug questions has the unfortunate effect of putting together chronic users of drugs with infrequent users for all of the subsequent analyses, which results in a considerable measurement error. This implies a need for improved methods to determine the optimal recall period for different drugs and it is crucial to include more details in questions on drug use to increase the validity of this information.

Drug use Health surveys Non‐prescription drugs Norway Pharmacoepidemiology Questionnaires Self‐evaluated Validity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Spitzer WO. Drugs as determinants of health and disease in the population. An orientation to the bridge science of pharmacoepidemiology. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1991;44(8):823-30.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sartor F, Walckiers D. Estimate of disease prevalence using drug consumption data. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995;141(8):782-7.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thor T. Hur mår Du Sverige? Ohälsa och vårdutnyttjande i Sverige-undersökningar om levnadsförhållanden (ULF) som underlag för planering. Stockholm: SPRI; 1982.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Furu K, Straume B. Use of antacids in a general population: the impact of health-related variables, lifestyle and sociodemographic characteristics. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1999;52(6):509-16.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eggen AE. Pattern of drug use in a general population--prevalence and predicting factors: the Tromsø study. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1994;23(6):1262-72.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Antonov K, Isacson D. Headache and analgesic use in Sweden. Headache 1998;38(2):97-104.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Idler EL, Angel RJ. Self-rated health and mortality in the NHANES-I epidemiologic follow-up-study. Am. J. Public Health 1990;80(4):446-452.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fylkesnes K, Forde OH. Determinants and dimensions involved in self-evaluation of health. Social Science & Medicine 1992;35(3):271-279.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Martikainen P, Aromaa A, Heliovaara M, Klaukka T, Knekt P, Maatela J, et al. Reliability of perceived health by sex and age. Social Science & Medicine 1999;48(8):1117-22.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Furu K, Straume B, Thelle DS. Legal drug use in a general population: association with gender, morbidity, health care utilization, and lifestyle characteristics. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1997;50(3):341-9.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Johnson RE, Pope CR. Health status and social factors in nonprescribed drug use. Med. Care 1983;21(2):225-33.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosholm JU, Christensen K. Relationship between drug use and self-reported health in elderly Danes. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 1997;53(3-4):179-83.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Svärdh C, Isacson D, Pedersen NL. Self-rated health among cardiovascular drug users in a study of Swedish twins. Scand. J. Soc. Med. 1998;26(3):223-31.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ramm J, Strøm K, Steffensen R. Health Survey 1995 (Helseundersøkelsen 1995). Oslo: Statistics Norway; 1998. Report No.: C516.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Olsen J. Epidemiology deserves better questionnaires. IEA European Questionnaire Group. International Epidemiological Association. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1998;27(6):935.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Bruin A, Picavet H, Nossikov A, editors. Health interview surveys. Towards international harmonization of methods and instruments. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 1996.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Last JM. A dictionary of epidemiology. 3rd edition. New York: Oxford University Press; 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    West S, Strom B. Validity of pharmacoepidemiology drug and diagnosis data. In: Strom B, editor. Pharmacoepidemiology. Second edition ed: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; 1994. p. 549-580.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    West SL, Savitz DA, Koch G, Sheff KL, Strom BL, Guess HA, et al. Demographics, health behaviors, and past drug use as predictors of recall accuracy for previous prescription medication use. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1997;50(8):975-980.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    West SL, Savitz DA, Koch G, Strom BL, Guess HA, Hartzema A. Recall accuracy for prescription medications: self-report compared with database information. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1995;142(10):1103-12.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kehoe R, Wu SY, Leske MC, Chylack LT. Comparing selfreported and physician-reported medical history. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1994;139(8):813-818.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heerdink ER, Leufkens HG, Koppedraaijer C, Bakker A. Information on drug use in the elderly: a comparison of pharmacy, general-practitioner and patient data. Pharmacy World & Science 1995;17(1):20-4.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gaist D, Sorensen HT, Hallas J. The Danish prescription registries. Dan. Med. Bull. 1997;44(4):445-8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kari Furu
    • 1
  • Dag S. Thelle
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of General Practice and Community MedicineUniversity of OsloOSLONorway
  2. 2.Institute of Heart and Lung DiseasesGöteborg UniversityGöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations