Accuracy of Self-Reported Arterial Hypertension in Brazil: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

The estimation of systemic arterial hypertension (SAH) through self-reporting questionnaires in populationbased surveys presents advantages, such as low cost, simplicity of measurement, and ease of application. However, as with any diagnostic test, classification errors are expected to occur, with inevitable false-positive and false-negative cases. Thus, a certain proportion of people will report having the disease when in fact they do not have it, and a group of people will report being healthy when they are actually sick. 1,2 To quantify the accuracy of this procedure for SAH measurement, it is possible to calculate self-reported SAH sensitivity and specificity indicators, using a reference standard. The most common "gold standards" for this are the use of sphygmomanometers 1, 2 and of automatic measurement devices. [3][4][5] Results found for sensitivity in these studies varied from 0.45 4 to 0.84 3 , and, for specificity, from 0.81 5 to 1 4 .

Validity of self‐reported hypertension and related factors in the adult population: Preliminary results from the cohort in the west of Iran

“…In the absence of objective and widespread prevalence measurements, self‐reported diagnoses may include a comprehensive information source for recording clinical and subclinical conditions 4 . Estimating hypertension through a self‐report approach in population‐based surveys has benefits including low cost and rapid implementation 5 . However, like any other diagnostic tests, classification bias is expected to occur with unavoidable false positives and negatives 5,6 …”

“…5 However, like any other diagnostic tests, classification bias is expected to occur with unavoidable false positives and negatives. 5,6 Present studies have shown differences between self-reported and measured estimates of health-related data. 7 Evidence from developed countries shows there is a large difference between self-reported and clinical measurements of hypertension and diabetes, and this disagreement may vary among different socioeconomic groups.…”

“… 5 However, like any other diagnostic tests, classification bias is expected to occur with unavoidable false positives and negatives. 5 , 6 …”

“…4 Estimating hypertension through a self-report approach in population-based surveys has benefits including low cost and rapid implementation. 5 However, like any other diagnostic tests, classification bias is expected to occur with unavoidable false positives and negatives. 5,6 Present studies have shown differences between self-reported and measured estimates of health-related data.…”