|
Academic/Biomedical Research
News & Jobs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free Newsletters
Archive
My Subscriptions
News by Subject
News by Disease
News by Date
PLoS
Search News
Post Your News
JoVE
Job Seeker Login
Most Recent Jobs
Search Jobs
Post Resume
Career Fairs
Career Resources
For Employers
Regional News
US & Canada
Biotech Bay
Biotech Beach
Genetown
Pharm Country
BioCapital
BioMidwest
Bio NC
BioForest
Southern Pharm
BioCanada East
US Device
Europe
Asia
Company Profiles
Research Store
Research Events
Post an Event
Real Estate
Business Opportunities
|
|
|
|
PLoS By Category | Recent
PLoS Articles
|
|
Immunology - Public Health and Epidemiology - Respiratory Medicine
|
A Comparison of Three Methods to Measure Asthma in Epidemiologic Studies: Results from the Danish National Birth Cohort
Published:
Friday, May 11, 2012
Author:
Susanne Hansen et al.
by Susanne Hansen, Marin Strøm, Ekaterina Maslova, Erik Lykke Mortensen, Charlotta Granström, Sjurdur F. Olsen
Asthma is a heterogeneous outcome and how the condition should be measured to best capture clinically relevant disease in epidemiologic studies remains unclear. We compared three methods of measuring asthma in the Danish National Birth Cohort (n>50.000). When the children were 7 years old, the prevalence of asthma was estimated from a self-administered questionnaire using parental report of doctor diagnoses, ICD-10 diagnoses from a population-based hospitalization registry, and data on anti-asthmatic medication from a population-based prescription registry. We assessed the agreement between the methods using kappa statistics. Highest prevalence of asthma was found using the prescription registry (32.2%) followed by the self-report (12.0%) and the hospitalization registry (6.6%). We found a substantial non-overlap between the methods (kappa?=?0.21–0.38). When all three methods were combined the asthma prevalence was 3.6%. In conclusion, self-reported asthma, ICD-10 diagnoses from a hospitalization registry and data on anti-asthmatic medication use from a prescription registry lead to different prevalences of asthma in the same cohort of children. The non-overlap between the methods may be due to different abilities of the methods to identify cases with different phenotypes, in which case they should be treated as separate outcomes in future aetiological studies.
More...
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|