Suppr超能文献

医生诊断的心绞痛自我报告病史的有效性。

Validity of a self-reported history of doctor-diagnosed angina.

作者信息

Lampe F C, Walker M, Lennon L T, Whincup P H, Ebrahim S

机构信息

Department of Primary Care and Population Sciences, Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine, London, UK.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 1999 Jan;52(1):73-81. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00146-2.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess the validity of a self-reported history of doctor-diagnosed angina in population-based studies in men. Subjects were 5789 men from the British Regional Heart Study who reported being without an angina diagnosis at entry (1978-1980) and were alive at the end of 1992, aged 52 to 75 years. In 1992, subjects were asked in a self-administered questionnaire if they recalled ever having had a doctor diagnosis of angina. Self-report of diagnosed angina was compared with general practice (GP) record of angina obtained from reviews of medical records from study entry to the end of 1992. Men were followed for a further 3 years from 1992 for major ischemic heart disease events. The prevalence of diagnosed angina in 1992 was 10.1% according to self-reported history and 8.9% according to GP record review. There was substantial agreement between the two sources of information: 80% of men with a GP record of angina reported their diagnosis, and 70% of men who reported an angina diagnosis had confirmation of this from the record review. When all ischemic heart disease (angina or myocardial infarction) was considered, agreement was higher. Genuine angina was likely in many of the 177 men who had self-reported angina not confirmed by the GP record review: 78 had an ischemic heart disease history (myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization) identified by the review, and 31 had a GP record of angina after 1992. Angina symptoms, nitrate use, cardiological investigation, and surgical intervention for angina compared between agreement groups showed a very consistent pattern. All these indicators of angina were most common in men with both self-report and GP record of angina, least common in men with neither self-report nor GP record of angina, but had a substantially higher prevalence in men with self-reported angina only than in those with GP-recorded angina only. After 3 years follow-up from 1992, 9.5% of men with both self-report and GP record of angina, and 11.3% of men with self-reported angina only had experienced a new major ischemic heart disease event; compared to 5.7% of men with a GP record of angina only and 2.7% of those without angina by either criteria. This pattern of risk remained similar after adjustment for age and previous myocardial infarction. These results suggest that self-reported history of a doctor diagnosis of angina is a valid measure of diagnosed angina in population-based studies in men.

摘要

本研究的目的是评估在基于人群的男性研究中,自我报告的医生诊断心绞痛病史的有效性。研究对象为来自英国地区心脏研究的5789名男性,他们在研究开始时(1978 - 1980年)报告无心绞痛诊断,并且在1992年底仍然存活,年龄在52至75岁之间。1992年,通过自我管理问卷询问研究对象是否记得曾被医生诊断为心绞痛。将自我报告的心绞痛诊断与从研究开始到1992年底的病历审查中获得的全科医生(GP)心绞痛记录进行比较。从1992年开始,对男性进行了为期3年的随访,以观察主要缺血性心脏病事件。根据自我报告的病史,1992年确诊心绞痛的患病率为10.1%,而根据全科医生记录审查为8.9%。两种信息来源之间存在高度一致性:在有全科医生心绞痛记录的男性中,80%报告了他们的诊断,而在报告有心绞痛诊断的男性中,70%从记录审查中得到了证实。当考虑所有缺血性心脏病(心绞痛或心肌梗死)时,一致性更高。在177名自我报告有心绞痛但未被全科医生记录审查证实的男性中,许多人可能患有真正的心绞痛:78人经审查有缺血性心脏病史(心肌梗死或冠状动脉血运重建),31人在1992年后有全科医生的心绞痛记录。对一致性分组之间的心绞痛症状、硝酸盐使用、心脏检查和心绞痛手术干预进行比较,显示出非常一致的模式。所有这些心绞痛指标在既有自我报告又有全科医生心绞痛记录的男性中最常见,在既无自我报告也无全科医生心绞痛记录的男性中最不常见,但在仅有自我报告心绞痛的男性中的患病率比仅有全科医生记录心绞痛的男性高得多。从1992年开始随访3年后,既有自我报告又有全科医生心绞痛记录的男性中有9.5%,仅有自我报告心绞痛的男性中有11.3%经历了新的主要缺血性心脏病事件;相比之下,仅有全科医生心绞痛记录的男性中有5.7%,而根据任何一项标准均无心绞痛的男性中有2.7%经历了此类事件。在对年龄和既往心肌梗死进行调整后,这种风险模式仍然相似。这些结果表明,在基于人群的男性研究中,自我报告的医生诊断心绞痛病史是确诊心绞痛的有效指标。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验