Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28617703›Full record

ArticleMedical care2017

Using Self-reports or Claims to Assess Disease Prevalence: It's Complicated.

Patricia St Clair, Étienne Gaudette, Henu Zhao, Bryan Tysinger, Roxanna Seyedin, Dana P Goldman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical care, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Coronary heart disease risk factors in taxi drivers in Medellín.Occupational medicine (Oxford, England) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Racial/Ethnic and Educational Disparities in the Impact of Diabetes on Population Health Among the U.S.-Born Population.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Patricia St ClairSchaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics, University of Southern California Price School and School of Pharmacy, Los Angeles, CA.
Étienne Gaudette
Henu Zhao
Bryan Tysinger
Roxanna Seyedin
Dana P Goldman

Funding

USC-Yale Roybal Center for Behavioral Interventions in AgingP30AG024968 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI JASON N. DOCTOR · 2004 to 2026
$14.7M
USC Resource Center for Minority Aging Research (US-RCMAR)P30AG043073 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Mireille Jacobson · 2012 to 2026
$10.1M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG024968NIA NIH HHS P30 AG043073
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTwo common ways of measuring disease prevalence include: (1) using self-reported disease diagnosis from survey responses; and (2) using disease-specific diagnosis codes found in administrative data. Because they do not suffer from self-report biases, claims are often assumed to be more objective. However, it is not clear that claims always produce better prevalence estimates.

objectiveConduct an assessment of discrepancies between self-report and claims-based measures for 2 diseases in the US elderly to investigate definition, selection, and measurement error issues which may help explain divergence between claims and self-report estimates of prevalence. DATA: Self-reported data from 3 sources are included: the Health and Retirement Study, the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Claims-based disease measurements are provided from Medicare claims linked to Health and Retirement Study and Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey participants, comprehensive claims data from a 20% random sample of Medicare enrollees, and private health insurance claims from Humana Inc.

methodsPrevalence of diagnosed disease in the US elderly are computed and compared across sources. Two medical conditions are considered: diabetes and heart attack.

resultsComparisons of diagnosed diabetes and heart attack prevalence show similar trends by source, but claims differ from self-reports with regard to levels. Selection into insurance plans, disease definitions, and the reference period used by algorithms are identified as sources contributing to differences.

conclusionsClaims and self-reports both have strengths and weaknesses, which researchers need to consider when interpreting estimates of prevalence from these 2 sources.

Indexed as

Insurance Claim ReviewSelf ReportAgedDiabetes MellitusFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMyocardial InfarctionPopulation SurveillancePrevalenceReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID28617703
PMCPMC5507726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.