Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The context of a study influences the reporting of symptoms

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To study whether different information on a study may influence the reporting of symptoms suspected to be related to poor indoor climate at the workplace or at home.

Methods

A questionnaire was mailed to a random sample (n=4,000) of the general population in Denmark. The participants were randomly allocated to two study groups, each group receiving a slightly different information letter. There were 2,710 subjects (67.8%) who completed the questionnaire, and 2,164 subjects, who were in employment, were included in the study. All subjects were informed that the purpose of the study was to assess the prevalence of non-specific symptoms related to the indoor climate at work and in dwellings. However, in the letter to one study group it was stated that knowledge was especially lacking about health effects related to the indoor climate at work (n=1,468). To the other study group the words at work were replaced with at home (n=696). The questionnaires were similar for each study group.

Results

The prevalence rates of symptoms were similar, but reporting of work-relatedness and home-relatedness differed considerably between the two study groups. If the information letter focused slightly more on the workplace than the home, the subjects were more likely to report that their symptoms were work-related (significant unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) between 1.8 and 5.5). We found that adjusting the results for several confounders mainly led to higher estimates of ORs. Likewise, the subjects reported more home-related symptoms if focus was on the environment at home (significant unadjusted ORs between 5.7 and 20.6).

Conclusions

The information about a study may play an important role in the reporting of symptoms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aaron LA, Buchwald D (2001) A review of the evidence for overlap among unexplained clinical conditions. Ann Intern Med 134:868–881

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Dalton P, Wysocki CJ, Brody MJ, Lawley HJ (1997) The influence of cognitive bias on the perceived odor, irritation and health symptoms from chemical exposure. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 69:407–417

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK, Apolone G, Bjorner JB, Brazier JE, Bullinger M, Kaasa S, Leplege A, Prieto L, Sullivan M (1998) Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1171–1178

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mikatavage MA, Rose VE, Funkhouser E, Oestenstad RK, Dillon K, Reynolds KD (1995) Beyond air quality—factors that affect prevalence estimates of sick building syndrome. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 56:1141–1146

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Moffatt S, Mulloli TP, Bhopal R, Foy C, Phillimore P (2000) An exploration of awareness bias in two environmental epidemiology studies. Epidemiology 11:199–208

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ooi PL, Goh KT (1997) Sick building syndrome: an emerging stress-related disorder? Int J Epidemiol 26:1243–1249

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Roht LH, Vernon SW, Weir FW, Pier SM, Sullivan P, Reed LJ (1985) Community exposure to hazardous waste disposal sites: assessing reporting bias. Am J Epidemiol 122:418–433

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. SAS Institute (version 6.12) (1996) Cary, North Carolina, USA

  9. Setterlind S, Larsson G (1995) The stress profile: a psychosocial approach to measuring stress. Stress Med 11:85–92

    Google Scholar 

  10. Spurgeon A (2002) Models of unexplained symptoms associated with occupational and environmental exposures. Environ Health Perspect 110 [Suppl 4]:601–605

    Google Scholar 

  11. Spurgeon A, Gompertz D, Harrington JM (1997) Non-specific symptoms in response to hazard exposure in the workplace. J Psychosom Res 43:43–49

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Thorn A (2000) Emergence and preservation of a chronically sick building. J Epidemiol Community Health 54:552–556

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wessely S, Nimnuan C, Sharpe M (1999) Functional somatic syndromes: one or many? Lancet 354:936–939

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Danish Working Environment Council financially supported the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Occupational Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital, Nordre Ringvej 57, 2600, Glostrup, Denmark

    Charlotte Brauer & Sigurd Mikkelsen

Authors
  1. Charlotte Brauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sigurd Mikkelsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charlotte Brauer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brauer, C., Mikkelsen, S. The context of a study influences the reporting of symptoms. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 76, 621–624 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-003-0463-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-003-0463-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation