Dales R E, White J, Bhumgara C, McMullen E
Air Pollution-Health Effects Research Section, Health Canada, Canada.
Eur J Epidemiol. 1997 Jul;13(5):541-5. doi: 10.1023/a:1007311912777.
Assessment of cough in the clinical setting as well as in community-based studies of respiratory epidemiology has relied on self-reports. To examine the accuracy and potential for systematic bias in reported cough during a field study, questionnaires administered to parents about their childrens' coughing were compared to overnight cough recordings performed in 145 homes in the community of Wallaceburg, Canada. Percentage agreement between reported and recorded coughing was low, with kappa statistics ranging from 0.02-0.10. Compared to non-smoking parents, smokers under-reported their childrens' coughing (p = 0.01). The association found between parental smoking and recorded coughing was biased towards the null when reported coughing was substituted for recorded coughing: the odds ratio between parental smoking and recorded coughing was 3.1 (95% CI: 1.1-8.8) whereas for reported coughing it was 0.6 (95% CI: 0.2-1.7), the difference in the odds ratios being significant at p = 0.03. When carrying out field surveys, consideration should be given to measuring cough in a subsample of the population in order to estimate the degree of bias inherent in the questionnaire-based results.
在临床环境以及基于社区的呼吸道流行病学研究中,咳嗽评估一直依赖于自我报告。为了在一项实地研究中检验报告咳嗽的准确性和系统偏差可能性,将向家长发放的关于其子女咳嗽情况的问卷,与在加拿大华莱士堡社区145户家庭中进行的夜间咳嗽记录进行了比较。报告咳嗽与记录咳嗽之间的百分比一致性较低,kappa统计值在0.02至0.10之间。与不吸烟的家长相比,吸烟的家长对其子女咳嗽情况报告不足(p = 0.01)。当用报告咳嗽替代记录咳嗽时,所发现的家长吸烟与记录咳嗽之间的关联偏向于无效:家长吸烟与记录咳嗽之间的比值比为3.1(95%置信区间:1.1 - 8.8),而对于报告咳嗽,该比值比为0.6(95%置信区间:0.2 - 1.7),比值比的差异在p = 0.03时具有显著性。在进行实地调查时,应考虑在一部分人群中测量咳嗽,以便估计基于问卷结果中固有的偏差程度。