Vinko Matej, Kukec Andreja, Zaletel-Kragelj Lijana
Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Vrazov trg 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
National Institute of Public Heath, Trubarjeva cesta 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Zdr Varst. 2025 Sep 1;64(3):143-151. doi: 10.2478/sjph-2025-0018. eCollection 2025 Sep.
This study assessed discrepancies between self-reported and administrative data sources in identifying mental health issues in Slovenia, and investigated associated socio-demographic factors.
Data were linked from the 2019 Slovenian European Health Interview Survey (EHIS; n=9,900) and national health administrative databases capturing inpatient hospitalisations, outpatient prescription drugs and mental health-related sick leave. Mental health issues were identified in EHIS by self-report and in administrative databases using diagnostic codes and medication claims. Socio-demographic factors were obtained from EHIS. Discrepancies were assessed and multinomial logistic regression was used to analyse the association between these factors and the source of case identification.
Of the 9,900 EHIS respondents, 1,336 (13.5%) self-reported mental health issues, while 1,675 (16.9%) were identified in administrative databases. Only 613 individuals (4.6% of the total sample) were identified in both sources. Older age was associated with being identified in both data sources and administrative data only compared to not being identified. Females and unemployed persons were more likely than males and employed persons to be identified as having mental health issues, regardless of the data source. Compared to those with primary education or lower, individuals with higher education were less likely to be identified in administrative data only or in both data sources.
discrepancies exist between self-reported and administrative data sources in identifying mental health issues. Discrepancies are associated with socio-demographic factors and may lead to different interpretations of population mental health. This study underscores the importance of cautiously interpreting self-reported and administrative health data in public health.
本研究评估了斯洛文尼亚在识别心理健康问题时自我报告数据源与行政数据源之间的差异，并调查了相关的社会人口因素。
数据来自2019年斯洛文尼亚欧洲健康访谈调查（EHIS；n = 9900）以及国家健康行政数据库，后者记录了住院治疗、门诊处方药和与心理健康相关的病假情况。在EHIS中通过自我报告识别心理健康问题，在行政数据库中使用诊断代码和药物报销记录来识别。社会人口因素来自EHIS。评估差异，并使用多项逻辑回归分析这些因素与病例识别来源之间的关联。
在9900名EHIS受访者中，1336人（13.5%）自我报告有心理健康问题，而行政数据库中识别出1675人（16.9%）。只有613人（占总样本的4.6%）在两个数据源中都被识别出来。与未被识别相比，年龄较大与在两个数据源和仅行政数据中被识别有关。无论数据源如何，女性和失业者比男性和就业者更有可能被识别为有心理健康问题。与小学及以下学历者相比，高等教育学历者在仅行政数据或两个数据源中被识别的可能性较小。
在识别心理健康问题时，自我报告数据源与行政数据源之间存在差异。差异与社会人口因素有关，可能导致对人群心理健康的不同解读。本研究强调了在公共卫生中谨慎解读自我报告和行政健康数据的重要性。
