2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.12.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validity and reliability of self-reported arthritis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

2
82
1
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(87 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
2
82
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, this does not necessarily lead to a bias in the reporting of CAM prevalence. Moreover, the self report used is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-recommended case definition for surveillance (14) and has been shown to have sensitivity of 72.3% and specificity of 72.4% in comparison with evaluation by a rheumatologist (22). A third limitation is our decision not to include data on individual herbs in these analyses.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…However, this does not necessarily lead to a bias in the reporting of CAM prevalence. Moreover, the self report used is the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-recommended case definition for surveillance (14) and has been shown to have sensitivity of 72.3% and specificity of 72.4% in comparison with evaluation by a rheumatologist (22). A third limitation is our decision not to include data on individual herbs in these analyses.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Previous studies have shown that the estimates of the prevalences of painful musculoskeletal conditions are greatly influenced by the method of case definition (42,50). The validity of chronic joint symptoms as an indicator of possible arthritis has been examined in a limited number of studies (17,18), with results suggesting that only ϳ60% of people ages 45-64 years who meet the case definition for chronic joint symptoms have some form of arthritis on clinical examination. The accuracy of chronic joint symptoms as an indicator of arthritis was reported to increase with age, with 90% of individuals with chronic joint symptoms having clinically confirmed arthritis at ages Ն65 years.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the health service implications of identifying individuals with chronic joint symptoms are poorly understood because information on the impact of this condition on health, activity limitations, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is limited. It has also been reported that a substantial proportion of people who have chronic joint symptoms do not have arthritis on clinical examination (17,18). These findings have given rise to concerns that people with transient joint symptoms (defined as the experience of joint pain, aching, stiffness, or swelling but not on most days for the past month), resulting from joint injury, for example, may be misclassified as cases of possible arthritis (19).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, respondents self-reported a doctor diagnosis of arthritis, which may be subject to recall bias. However, this arthritis case finding question appears valid for public health surveillance (47,48). Second, study data are cross-sectional in nature and cannot be used to infer causation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%