[Health survey in Campinas, São Paulo State, Brazil (ISACamp): comparison of estimates according to ownership of a residential telephone line].

Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brasil.
Cadernos de saúde pública / Ministério da Saúde, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública (Impact Factor: 0.89). 10/2011; 27(10):1951-60. DOI: 10.1590/S0102-311X2011001000008
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The study assesses differences in socio-demographic, lifestyle, and health-related characteristics among adults with and without residential telephone lines using data from a health survey in Campinas, São Paulo State, Brazil, (2008-2009), through a population-based cross-sectional survey that included 2,637 adults (18 years and older). Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, prevalence, and 95% confidence intervals were used in the analysis. Estimates were also made of the bias associated with non-coverage of the population without telephones before and after adjusting for post-stratification. The impact of bias on the confidence intervals was assessed by the bias ratio. Some 76% of respondents owned residential telephone lines. Except for marital status, differences were observed in socio-demographic data according to ownership of residential telephones. After post-stratification adjustment, there was a decrease in bias estimates for variables associated with ownership of telephone lines. However, except for osteoporosis, post-stratification adjustment was insufficient to correct the non-coverage bias.

Download full-text


Available from: Maria Cecilia Goi Porto Alves, Mar 10, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) is widely used in general population surveys as a method of determining prevalence of hazardous drinking. However, its interpretation has been questioned particularly regarding the unequal contribution of the items to the total score, specifically, that the drinking frequency item contributes disproportionately to the score and may lead to inappropriate identification of some drinkers as hazardous drinkers. To explore these issues further as well as possible gender differences in the applicability of the AUDIT, we conducted analyses using a modified version of the AUDIT (AUDIT(M)) as part of a general population survey that used random digit dialing and computer-assisted telephone interviewing. Item and factor analyses were performed separately for men and women, and the impacts of excluding the frequency of drinking item in the measurement of mean scores, percentages and types of problems for men and women were examined. We found that the AUDIT(M) items loaded onto three distinct dimensions for both men and women: frequency of drinking; usual quantity and frequency of heavy-episodic drinking; problem consequences from drinking. In addition, we found that excluding the frequency question may give a more meaningful estimate of the percent of drinkers actually at risk of experiencing problems from drinking for both men and women. Finally, although our analyses identified only minor gender differences in the structure of the AUDIT and good sensitivity for identifying problem drinkers among both men and women, significant gender differences in the types of problems experienced suggest that use and interpretation of the AUDIT should routinely take gender into consideration.
    Drug and Alcohol Dependence 06/2007; 88(2-3):282-90. DOI:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.11.013 · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Response rates for the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) have declined in recent years. The response rate in 1993 was approximately 72%; in 2006, the response rate was approximately 51%. To assess the impact of this decline on the quality of BRFSS estimates, we compared selected health and risk factor estimates from BRFSS with similar estimates from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). We reviewed questionnaires from the 3 surveys and identified a set of comparable measures related to smoking prevalence, alcohol consumption, medical conditions, vaccination, health status, insurance coverage, cost barriers to medical care, testing for human immunodeficiency virus, and body measurements (height and weight). We compared weighted estimates for up to 15 outcome measures, including overall measures and measures for 12 population subgroups. We produced design-appropriate point estimates and carried out statistical tests of hypotheses on the equality of such estimates. We then calculated P values for comparisons of NHIS and NHANES estimates with their BRFSS counterparts. Although BRFSS and NHIS estimates were statistically similar for 5 of the 15 measures examined, BRFSS and NHANES estimates were statistically similar for only 1 of 6 measures. The observed differences for some of these comparisons were small, however. These surveys produced similar estimates for several outcome measures, although we observed significant differences as well. Many of the observed differences may have limited consequences for implementing related public health programs; other differences may require more detailed examination. In general, the range of BRFSS estimates examined here tends to parallel those from NHIS and NHANES, both of which have higher rates of participation.
    Preventing chronic disease 08/2008; 5(3):A80. · 1.96 Impact Factor
  • Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia 01/2008; 11. DOI:10.1590/S1415-790X2008000500003