A Comparison of Three Methods to Measure Asthma in Epidemiologic Studies: Results from the Danish National Birth Cohort

DSpace/Manakin Repository

A Comparison of Three Methods to Measure Asthma in Epidemiologic Studies: Results from the Danish National Birth Cohort

Citable link to this page

 

 
Title: A Comparison of Three Methods to Measure Asthma in Epidemiologic Studies: Results from the Danish National Birth Cohort
Author: Hansen, Susanne; Strøm, Marin; Maslova, Ekaterina; Mortensen, Erik Lykke; Granström, Charlotta; Olsen, Sjurdur F.

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: Hansen, Susanne, Marin Strøm, Ekaterina Maslova, Erik Lykke Mortensen, Charlotta Granström, and Sjurdur F. Olsen. 2012. A comparison of three methods to measure asthma in epidemiologic studies: results from the Danish National Birth Cohort. PLoS ONE 7(5): e36328.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: Asthma is a heterogeneous outcome and how the condition should be measured to best capture clinically relevant disease in epidemiologic studies remains unclear. We compared three methods of measuring asthma in the Danish National Birth Cohort (n>50.000). When the children were 7 years old, the prevalence of asthma was estimated from a self-administered questionnaire using parental report of doctor diagnoses, ICD-10 diagnoses from a population-based hospitalization registry, and data on anti-asthmatic medication from a population-based prescription registry. We assessed the agreement between the methods using kappa statistics. Highest prevalence of asthma was found using the prescription registry (32.2%) followed by the self-report (12.0%) and the hospitalization registry (6.6%). We found a substantial non-overlap between the methods (kappa = 0.21–0.38). When all three methods were combined the asthma prevalence was 3.6%. In conclusion, self-reported asthma, ICD-10 diagnoses from a hospitalization registry and data on anti-asthmatic medication use from a prescription registry lead to different prevalences of asthma in the same cohort of children. The non-overlap between the methods may be due to different abilities of the methods to identify cases with different phenotypes, in which case they should be treated as separate outcomes in future aetiological studies.
Published Version: doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036328
Other Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3350521/pdf/
Terms of Use: This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA
Citable link to this page: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:10483996
Downloads of this work:

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters