UNASSIGNED: Nonquantitative list-based or open 24-h recalls (24-HRs) have been shown to overestimate the prevalence of Minimum Dietary Diversity for Women (MDD-W), as compared with direct quantitative observations. However, the main sources of error are unknown.
UNASSIGNED: To assess the measurement agreement of proxy data collection methods for MDD-W, as compared with weighed food records (WFRs).
UNASSIGNED: Applying a noninferiority design, data were collected from 431 nonpregnant females in Ethiopia. MDD-W estimates from both proxy data collection methods were compared with the WFR prevalence by McNemar\'s chi-square tests, Cohen\'s Kappa, and receiver operator characteristic analyses. Ten-point food group diversity scores (FGDS) were compared by Bland-Altman plots, Wilcoxon matched-pairs tests, and weighted Kappa. Food group misclassifications were partitioned into errors related to respondent biases or the questionnaire development.
UNASSIGNED: List-based and open 24-HRs overreported MDD-W by 8 and 4 percentage points, respectively, as compared with WFR (objective MDD-W prevalence: 8%). Furthermore, list-based 24-HRs overestimated FGDS by 0.4 points (limits of agreement [LOA]: -1.1, 2.0), whereas open 24-HRs led to a 0.3 point (LOA: -1.2, 1.7) overestimate. Food groups most likely to be misreported using proxy data collection methods were \"pulses,\" \"nuts and seeds,\" \"dairy products,\" and \"other fruits.\" Underreporting of consumption occurred among <4% of females for all food groups. Furthermore, respondent biases were the predominant cause of food group overreporting, except for the \"pulses\" and \"other vegetables\" food groups, where food items incorrectly included on the food list were the main source of errors.
UNASSIGNED: Food group consumption misclassifications by proxy data collection methods were mainly attributable to females overreporting consumption because of respondent biases or the criterion for foods to be counted, rather than the suboptimal development of the food list in Ethiopia. To obtain precise and accurate MDD-W estimates at the (sub)national level, rigorous context-specific food list development, questionnaire pilot testing, and enumerator training are recommended to mitigate identified biases.

The peak-end rule, a memory heuristic in which the most emotionally salient part of an experience (i.e., peak) and conclusion of an experience (i.e., end) are weighted more heavily in summary evaluations, has been understudied in mental health contexts. The recent growth of intensive longitudinal methods has provided new opportunities for examining the peak-end rule in the retrospective recall of mental health symptoms, including measures often used in measurement-based care initiatives. Additionally, principles of the peak-end rule have significant potential to be applied to exposure-based therapy procedures. Additional research is needed to better understand the contexts in which, and persons for whom, the peak-end rule presents a greater risk of bias, to ultimately improve assessment strategies and clinical care.

OBJECTIVE: This paper discusses methodological challenges in epidemiological association analysis of a time-to-event outcome and hypothesized risk factors, where age/time at the onset of the outcome may be missing in some cases, a condition commonly encountered when the outcome is self-reported.
METHODS: A cohort study with long-term follow-up for outcome ascertainment such as the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS), a large cohort study of 5-year survivors of childhood cancer diagnosed in 1970-1999 in which occurrences and age at onset of various chronic health conditions (CHCs) are self-reported in surveys. Simple methods for handling missing onset age and their potential bias in the exposure-outcome association inference are discussed. The interval-censored method is discussed as a remedy for handling this problem. The finite sample performance of these approaches is compared through Monte Carlo simulations. Examples from the CCSS include four CHCs (diabetes, myocardial infarction, osteoporosis/osteopenia, and growth hormone deficiency).
RESULTS: The interval-censored method is useable in practice using the standard statistical software. The simulation study showed that the regression coefficient estimates from the \'Interval censored\' method consistently displayed reduced bias and, in most cases, smaller standard deviations, resulting in smaller mean square errors, compared to those from the simple approaches, regardless of the proportion of subjects with an event of interest, the proportion of missing onset age, and the sample size.
CONCLUSIONS: The interval-censored method is a statistically valid and practical approach to the association analysis of self-reported time-to-event data when onset age may be missing. While the simpler approaches that force such data into complete data may enable the standard analytic methods to be applicable, there is considerable loss in both accuracy and precision relative to the interval-censored method.

Potential differential and non-differential recall error in mobile phone use (MPU) in the multinational MOBI-Kids case-control study were evaluated. We compared self-reported MPU with network operator billing record data up to 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years before the interview date from 702 subjects aged between 10 and 24 years in eight countries. Spearman rank correlations, Kappa coefficients and geometric mean ratios (GMRs) were used. No material differences in MPU recall estimates between cases and controls were observed. The Spearman rank correlation coefficients between self-reported and recorded MPU in the most recent 3 months were 0.57 and 0.59 for call number and for call duration, respectively. The number of calls was on average underestimated by the participants (GMR = 0.69), while the duration of calls was overestimated (GMR = 1.59). Country, years since start of using a mobile phone, age at time of interview, and sex did not appear to influence recall accuracy for either call number or call duration. A trend in recall error was seen with level of self-reported MPU, with underestimation of use at lower levels and overestimation of use at higher levels for both number and duration of calls. Although both systematic and random errors in self-reported MPU among participants were observed, there was no evidence of differential recall error between cases and controls. Nonetheless, these sources of exposure measurement error warrant consideration in interpretation of the MOBI-Kids case-control study results on the association between children\'s use of mobile phones and potential brain cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injections are crucial in the diagnostic toolkit for evaluating SIJ pathology. Recall bias is an important component in patient-reported outcomes that has not been well studied in SIJ injection.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize the accuracy, direction, and magnitude of pain level recall bias following SIJ steroid injection and study the factors that affect patient recollection.
METHODS: Prospective cohort study.
METHODS: Level 1 academic medical center.
METHODS: Using standardized questionnaires, baseline Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11) scores were recorded for patients undergoing SIJ steroid injections at preinjection, at 4 hours postinjection, and at 24 hours postinjection. At a minimum of 2 weeks postinjection, patients were asked to recall their preinjection, 4-hour, and 24-hour postinjection NRS-11 scores. Actual and recalled NRS-11 scores were compared using paired t tests for each time interval. Multivariable linear regression was used to identify factors that correlated with consistent recall.
RESULTS: Sixty patients with a mean age of 66 years (65% women) were included. Compared to their preinjection pain score, patients showed considerable improvement at both 4 hours (mean difference [MD] = 3.28; 95% CI, 2.68 - 3.89), and 24 hours (MD = 3.23; 95% CI, 2.44 - 4.03) postinjection. Patient recollection of preinjection symptoms was more severe than actual (MD = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.31 - 0.99). Patient recollection of symptoms was also more severe than actual at 4 hours (MD = 0.50; 95% CI .04 - 1.04) as well as at 24 hours postinjection (MD = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.16 - 1.44). The magnitude of recall bias was mild and did not exceed the minimal clinically important difference. There was a moderate correlation between actual and recalled pain levels when comparing preinjection with the 4-hour postinjection NRS-11 score (correlation coefficient [r] =0.64; P < 0.001) and moderate correlation when comparing preinjection with the 24-hour postinjection NRS-11 score (r = 0.62; P < 0.001). Linear regression models showed that at preinjection, patients with a lower body mass index and the presence of coexisting psychiatric diagnoses were better at recalling their pain (P < 0.05). Patients with a higher body mass index also experienced less pain relief when comparing preinjection with the 4-hour postinjection NRS-11 score (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Recall pain scores were obtained via telephone surveys, which can lead to interview bias. One patient died, and 3 were lost to follow-up. We did not control for patient use of adjunctive pain relief modalities, which may modulate the overall response to injection. SIJ injections can also be diagnostic, so some patients may not have shared the same indication for injection or pain-generating diagnosis.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients had favorable pain level responses to their SIJ steroid injection for both actual and recall surveys. Although patients demonstrated poor recall of absolute pain scores at preinjection, 4-hour postinjection, and 24-hour postinjection, they demonstrated robust recall of their net pain score improvement at both 4- and 24-hours postinjection. These findings suggest that there is utility in using patient recollection to describe the magnitude of pain relief following treatment for sacroiliac joint dysfunction.

暂无摘要。

The Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM) is the recommended core outcome instrument for atopic dermatitis (AD) symptoms. POEM is reported by recalling the presence/absence of seven symptoms in the last 7 days.
To evaluate measurement errors in POEM recordings due to imperfect recall.
Using data from a clinical trial of 247 AD patients aged 12-65 years, we analysed the reported POEM score (r-POEM) and the POEM derived from the corresponding daily scores for the same seven symptoms without weekly recall (d-POEM). We quantified recall error by comparing the r-POEM and d-POEM for 777 patient-weeks collected from 207 patients, and estimated two components of recall error: (1) recall bias due to systematic errors in measurements and (2) recall noise due to random errors in measurements, using a bespoke statistical model.
POEM scores have a relatively low recall bias, but a high recall noise. Recall bias was estimated at 1.2 points lower for the r-POEM on average than the d-POEM, with a recall noise of 5.7 points. For example, a patient with a recall-free POEM of 11 (moderate) could report their POEM score anywhere from 5 to 14 (with 95% probability) because of recall error. Model estimates suggested that patients tend to recall itch and dryness more often than experienced (positive bias of less than 1 day), but less often for the other symptoms (bleeding, cracking, flaking, oozing/weeping and sleep disturbance; negative bias ranging 1-4 days).
In this clinical trial data set, we found that patients tended to slightly underestimate their symptoms when reporting POEM, with significant variation in how well they were able to recall the frequency of their symptoms every time they reported POEM. A large recall noise should be taken into consideration when interpreting POEM scores.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to evaluate the presence of recall bias when patients retrospectively report cough scores.
UNASSIGNED: Patients who underwent lung surgery between July 2021 and November 2021 were recruited for this study. We retrospectively assessed the severity of cough within the past 24 hours and the past 7 days using a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Recall bias was defined as the difference between the scores reported on the two assessments. Patients were grouped based on the longitudinal change in cough scores from pre-operation to 4 weeks after discharge using group-based trajectory models. Using generalized estimating equation to explore the factors influencing recall bias.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, 199 patients were analyzed and demonstrated the three distinct trajectories of post-discharge cough: high (21.1%), medium (58.3%), and low (20.6%). Significant recall bias was found in week 2 for the high-trajectory patients (6.26 vs 5.10, P<0.01) and in week 3 for the medium-trajectory patients (2.88 vs 2.60, P=0.01). Among all recall bias, 41.8% were of underestimation, and 21.7% of overestimation. The high trajectory group (β=1.14, P<0.01) and measurement interval (β=0.36, P<0.01) were risk factors for underestimation, while post-discharge time (β=-0.57, P<0.01) and measurement interval (β=-0.13, P=0.02) were protective factors for overestimation.
UNASSIGNED: Retrospective assessment of post-discharge cough in patients who underwent lung surgery will introduce recall bias, with a tendency of underestimation. The high-trajectory group, interval time and post-discharge time are influencing factors of recall bias. For patients with severe cough at discharge, a shorter recall periods should be employed for monitoring, due to the large bias that results from a longer recall period.