ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences2023
Validation of Self-Reported Cancer Diagnoses by Respondent Cognitive Status in the U.S. Health and Retirement Study.
Article in The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-term comparative trajectories of health, behavioral, and economic outcomes: From pre-diagnosis to survivorship.PloS one · 2026Article
- Building Survey Data Infrastructure on Aging: The Legacy of NIA.The Gerontologist · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCancer and dementia are becoming increasingly common co-occurring conditions among older adults. Yet, the influence of participant cognitive status on the validity of self-reported data among older adults in population-based cohorts is unknown. We thus compared self-reported cancer diagnoses in the U.S. Health and Retirement Study (HRS) against claims from linked Medicare records to ascertain the validity of self-reported diagnoses by participant cognitive and proxy interview status.
methodsUsing data from HRS participants aged ≥67 who had at least 90% continuous enrollment in fee-for-service Medicare, we examined the validity of self-reported first incident cancer diagnoses from biennial HRS interviews against diagnostic claim records in linked Medicare data (reference standard) for interviews from 2000 to 2016. Cognitive status was classified as normal, cognitive impairment no dementia (CIND), or dementia using the Langa-Weir method. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and κ for cancer diagnosis.
resultsOf the 8 280 included participants, 23.6% had cognitive impairment without dementia (CIND) or dementia, and 10.7% had a proxy respondent due to an impairment. Self-reports of first incident cancer diagnoses for participants with normal cognition had 70.2% sensitivity and 99.8% specificity (κ = 0.79). Sensitivity declined substantially with cognitive impairment and proxy response (56.7% for CIND, 53.0% for dementia, 60.0% for proxy respondents), indicating poor validity for study participants with CIND, dementia, or a proxy respondent.
conclusionsSelf-reported cancer diagnoses in the U.S. HRS have poor validity for participants with cognitive impairment, dementia, or a proxy respondent. Population-based cancer research among older adults will be strengthened with linkage to Medicare claims.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.