ArticleEpidemiology and health2024
Validation of self-reported morbidities in the Korean Atomic Bomb Survivor Cohort.
Article in Epidemiology and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Validation of Self-Reported Disease History in Korea: A National Health Insurance Cohort Study.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the agreement of disease status collected through a survey of the Korean Atomic Bomb Survivor Cohort (K-ABC), compared with medical claim records from the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database and the Korean Central Cancer Registry (KCCR).
methodsData on the lifetime physician-diagnosed morbidities of 1,215 K-ABC participants were collected through an interviewer-administered questionnaire between 2020 and 2022. Survey data were linked to the NHIS and KCCR databases. Eleven diseases were included for validation. We evaluated the following indicators: sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, the area under the curve, and the kappa coefficient.
resultsThe mean±standard deviation age was 62.1±18.7 years, and 42.6% of the participants were aged ≥70 years. Hypertension and cataracts showed the highest prevalence rates (33.8 and 28.8%, respectively). Hypertension, diabetes, and cancer demonstrated high sensitivity (>0.8) and specificity (>0.9), whereas diabetes, cancer, myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, and asthma exhibited high accuracy (>0.9). In contrast, arthritis, allergic rhinitis, and asthma showed low sensitivity (<0.4) and kappa values (<0.3). In the participants aged ≥70 years, the kappa value was ≥0.4 for all diseases except arthritis, allergic rhinitis, and asthma.
conclusionsThe results from this initial analysis showed relatively high agreement between the survey and NHIS/KCCR databases, especially for hypertension, diabetes, and cancer. Our findings suggest that the information on morbidities collected through the questionnaires in this cohort was valid for both younger and older individuals.
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.