IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1996865706-711_3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differences in the misreporting of chronic conditions, by level of education: The effect on inequalities in prevalence rates

Author

Listed:
  • Mackenbach, J.P.
  • Looman, C.W.N.
  • Van Der Meer, J.B.W.

Abstract

Objectives. Many studies of socioeconomic inequalities in the prevalence of chronic conditions rely on self-reports. For chronic nonspecific lung disease, heart disease, and diabetes mellitus, we studied the effects of misreporting on variations in prevalence rates by respondents' level of education. Method. In 1991, a health interview survey was conducted in the southeastern Netherlands with 2867 respondents. Respondents' answers were compared with validated diagnostic questionnaires in the same survey and the diagnoses given by the respondents' general practitioners. Results. Misreporting of chronic lung disease, heart disease, and diabetes may be extensive. Depending on the condition and the reference data used, the confirmation fractions ranged between .61 and .96 and the detection fractions between .13 and .93. Misreporting varied by level of education, and although various patterns were observed, the dominant pattern was that of more underreporting among less educated persons. The effects on prevalence rates were to underestimate differences by level of education to a sometimes considerable degree. Conclusions. Misreporting of chronic conditions differs by respondents' level of education. Health interview survey data underestimate socioeconomic inequalities in the prevalence of chronic conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Mackenbach, J.P. & Looman, C.W.N. & Van Der Meer, J.B.W., 1996. "Differences in the misreporting of chronic conditions, by level of education: The effect on inequalities in prevalence rates," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 86(5), pages 706-711.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1996:86:5:706-711_3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1996:86:5:706-711_3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.