Recall accuracy for prescription medications: Self-report compared with database information
ABSTRACT A methodological study was performed in 1992 to evaluate the accuracy of self-reported use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and noncontraceptive estrogens that had been dispensed during the previous 12 years. A sample of 560 individuals dispensed NSAIDs or estrogens, and 140 individuals without NSAID/estrogen dispensations were selected from the Group Health Cooperative pharmacy database. Demographic, behavioral, and drug information was ascertained by telephone interview for 356 persons with and 98 persons without NSAID/estrogen dispensations. Of those with only a single NSAID dispensation, 41% (95% confidence interval (CI) 32-50%) were able to recall any NSAID use compared with 85% (95% CI 76-94%) for those with multiple NSAID dispensations. Thirty percent (95% CI 24-36%) recalled the NSAID name, and 15% (95% CI 10-20%) recalled both the name and dose. For estrogens, 78% (95% CI 70-86%) recalled the name, but only 26% (95% CI 17-34%) recalled the name and dose. Age, but not sex, appeared to influence recall accuracy: Persons 50-65 years of age recalled the NSAID name more accurately than those aged 66-80 (odds ratio (OR) = 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-3.4). A similar advantage was noted for 50- to 65-year-old women in recalling the estrogen name (OR = 1.5, 95% CI 0.6-3.9). Drug name was recalled more frequently for exposures stopped 2-3 years prior to interview than for those stopped 7-11 years prior (OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.6-5.7, and OR = 2.4, 95% CI 0.9-6.7, for NSAIDs and estrogens, respectively). Specificity was consistently high, ranging from 92% to 100%. This study suggests significant underascertainment of self-reported prescription drug exposure but little evidence that exposures are overreported.
- SourceAvailable from: Raymond Noordam
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "A key advantage of this cohort design is that we were able to include all eligible incident antidepressant users, which minimizes the risk of selection bias. Also, in our opinion, the information bias is minimal as we used prescription records as the source of medication data (Strom and Carson, 1990; West et al., 1995). However, patients whose antidepressant treatment was initiated by a specialist (prior to cohort entry) may have been misclassified as the IPCI database largely consists of GP prescription data. "
ABSTRACT: The existing literature provides contradictory evidence on antidepressant use and risk of suicide. Some studies have shown that the use of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) is associated with an increased risk of suicide, especially during the first months of treatment, whereas other studies did not confirm this association. For this reason, our objective was to investigate the association between antidepressant use and risk of suicide in incident antidepressant users in relation to time since starting therapy. We conducted a population-based cohort study within the Dutch Integrated Primary Care Information (IPCI) database, in incident users of antidepressant therapy between 1994 and 2012 (n=27,712). Cox proportional hazard models were used to study the association between current use of SSRIs, tricyclic antidepressants (TCA) and other antidepressants and risk of suicide or attempted suicide. During follow-up, a total of 280 incident antidepressant users attempted or committed suicide. Current use of SSRIs (hazard ratio (HR): 0.78, 95% CI: 0.57-1.07), TCAs (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.48-1.42) or other antidepressants (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.47-1.18) was not statistically significantly associated with suicide compared to past use of any of the antidepressants. Although a large healthcare database was used, the number of reported cases of suicide (attempt) was low. This study did not indicate an increase in risk of suicide after starting treatment with SSRIs, TCAs or other antidepressants compared with past antidepressant use. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.Journal of Affective Disorders 12/2014; 174C:479-484. DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2014.12.032 · 3.71 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "This proposition is also consistent with the proximal nature of processing efficiency in the trait anxiety – driving lapses relationship found within the current study. The second possibility was based on the vulnerability to socially desirable response tendencies (Paulhus and Reid 1991) and inaccurate recall (West et al. 1995) of self-reporting questionnaires. Taken together, while the TA – processing efficiency – driving lapses hypothesis was not supported, findings from the current study demonstrated processing efficiency of the Central Executive to be a significant predictor of driving lapses. "
ABSTRACT: This study investigates the effects of trait anxiety on self-reported driving behaviours through its negative impacts on Central Executive functions. Following a self-report study that found trait anxiety to be significantly related to driving behaviours, the present study extended the predictions of Eysenck and Calvo’s Attentional Control Theory, proposing that anxiety affects driving behaviours, in particular driving lapses, through its impact across the Central Executive. Seventy-five Australian drivers participated in the study, completing the Parametric Go/No-Go and n-back tasks, as well as the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Driving Behaviour Questionnaire. While both trait anxiety and processing efficiency of the Central Executive was found to significantly predict driving lapses, trait anxiety remained a strong predictor of driving lapses after processing efficiency was controlled for. It is concluded that while processing efficiency of the central Executive is a key determinant of driving lapses, another Central Executive function that is closer to the driving lapses in the trait anxiety - driving lapses relationship may be needed. Suggestions regarding how to improve future trait anxiety - driving behaviours research are discussed.Journal of Risk Research 06/2014; DOI:10.1080/13669877.2014.919516 · 1.27 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "The linkage with NCDR and ONS allowed robust verification of cancer diagnosis and death data. The use of GP prescribed drug information eliminated the potential for recall bias incurred by self-report, and allowed temporal associations to be explored . The drug data reflect GP prescriptions, not drugs dispensed or actually consumed, and compliance cannot be assumed. "
ABSTRACT: Recent observational studies indicate that post-diagnostic use of aspirin in breast cancer patients may protect against cancer progression perhaps by inhibiting cyclooxygenase-2 dependent mechanisms. Evidence also supports a crucial role for interactions between tumour cells and circulating platelets in cancer growth and dissemination, therefore, use of low-dose aspirin may reduce the risk of death from cancer in breast cancer patients. A cohort of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients (1998-2006) were identified in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (and confirmed by cancer registry linkage). Cancer-specific deaths were identified up to 2011 from Office for National Statistics mortality data. A nested case-control analysis was conducted using conditional logistic regression to compare post-diagnostic aspirin exposure using General Practice prescription data in 1,435 cases (breast cancer deaths) with 5,697 controls (matched by age and year of diagnosis). After breast cancer diagnosis, 18.3% of cancer-specific deaths and 18.5% of matched controls received at least one prescription for low-dose aspirin, corresponding to an odds ratio (OR) of 0.98 (95% CI 0.83, 1.15). Adjustment for potential confounders (including stage and grade) had little impact on this estimate. No dose response relationship was observed when the number of tablets was investigated and no associations were seen when analyses were stratified by receipt of prescriptions for aspirin in the pre-diagnostic period, by stage at diagnosis or by receipt of prescriptions for hormone therapy. Overall, in this large population-based cohort of breast cancer patients, there was little evidence of an association between receipt of post-diagnostic prescriptions for low-dose aspirin and breast cancer-specific death. However, information was not available on medication compliance or over-the-counter use of aspirin, which may have contributed to the null findings.Breast cancer research: BCR 04/2014; 16(2):R34. DOI:10.1186/bcr3638 · 5.88 Impact Factor