Suppr超能文献

澳大利亚队列中自我报告与记录关联的献血史比较。

A comparison of self-reported and record-linked blood donation history in an Australian cohort.

机构信息

Centre for MEGA Epidemiology, School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

Transfusion. 2011 Oct;51(10):2189-98. doi: 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2011.03141.x. Epub 2011 Apr 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Questionnaire-based studies investigating blood donation history rely on the accurate recall of information from participants for results to be valid. This study aimed to retrieve electronic records from a national blood donation service and link them to self-reported history of donation to assess agreement between the two sources.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Between 2004 and 2006, a sample of participants of northern European descent was selected from the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (n = 31,192) to participate in the "HealthIron" study (n = 1438). A total of 1052 participants completed questionnaires that included questions about blood donation history. In 2009, consenting participants' records were linked to the Australian Red Cross Blood Service (ARCBS) to provide information on blood donations made between 1980 and follow-up (2004-2006). Those who commenced blood donation before 1980 were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 718 participants were available for analysis. Of these, 394 (55%) provided signed consent, including 182 (82%) of the 227 participants who self-reported ever donating blood. The two data sources were concordant for 331 (87%) of participants, with a κ statistic of 0.74 (SE, 0.05) indicating a high level of agreement. Participants tended to overstate by a factor of 2.0 (95% confidence interval, 1.7-2.2) the number of donations they had made when compared with ARCBS records.

CONCLUSION

Participants in studies assessing self-reported blood donation history are likely to correctly indicate whether or not they have ever donated blood. Quantitative estimates are potentially inaccurate and could benefit from validating a sample of records to quantify the bias.

摘要

背景

基于问卷的献血史研究依赖于参与者准确回忆信息,结果才有效。本研究旨在从国家献血服务中检索电子记录,并将其与自我报告的献血史联系起来,以评估两者之间的一致性。

研究设计和方法

2004 年至 2006 年,从墨尔本协作队列研究(n=31192)中选择了一组北欧血统的参与者参加“HealthIron”研究(n=1438)。共有 1052 名参与者完成了包括献血史问题的问卷。2009 年,同意参与的参与者的记录与澳大利亚红十字会血液服务局(ARCBS)进行了链接,以提供 1980 年至随访期间(2004-2006 年)献血的信息。那些在 1980 年前开始献血的人被排除在外。

结果

共有 718 名参与者可供分析。其中,394 名(55%)提供了书面同意,包括 182 名(82%)自我报告曾献血的 227 名参与者。两个数据源在 331 名(87%)参与者中是一致的,κ统计量为 0.74(SE,0.05),表明一致性很高。与 ARCBS 记录相比,参与者倾向于夸大他们献血的次数,倍数为 2.0(95%置信区间,1.7-2.2)。

结论

评估自我报告献血史的研究中的参与者很可能正确地表明他们是否曾经献血。定量估计可能不准确,可以通过验证记录样本来量化偏差,从而受益。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验