Recall Bias in Melanoma Risk Factors and Measurement Error Effects: A Nested Case-Control Study Within the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study

被引:39
作者
Parr, Christine L. [1 ]
Hjartaker, Anette [2 ]
Laake, Petter [1 ]
Lund, Eiliv [3 ]
Veierod, Marit B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oslo, Dept Biostat, Inst Basic Med Sci, N-0317 Oslo, Norway
[2] Inst Populat Based Canc Res, Canc Registry Norway, Oslo, Norway
[3] Univ Tromso, Inst Community Med, Tromso, Norway
关键词
bias (epidemiology); case-control studies; cohort studies; epidemiologic measurements; melanoma; questionnaires; reproducibility of results; risk factors; CUTANEOUS MALIGNANT-MELANOMA; METAANALYSIS; RELIABILITY; ASSOCIATION; PREDICTORS; EXPOSURE; HISTORY; COHORT;
D O I
10.1093/aje/kwn363
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Case-control studies of melanoma have the potential for recall bias after much public information about the relation with ultraviolet radiation. Recall bias has been investigated in few studies and only for some risk factors. A nested case-control study of recall bias was conducted in 2004 within the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study: 208 melanoma cases and 2,080 matched controls were invited. Data were analyzed for 162 cases (response, 78%) and 1,242 controls (response, 77%). Questionnaire responses to several host factors and ultraviolet exposures collected at enrollment in 1991-1997 and in 2004 were compared stratified on case-control status. Shifts in responses were observed among both cases and controls, but a shift in cases was observed only for skin color after chronic sun exposure, and a larger shift in cases was observed for nevi. Weighted kappa was lower for cases than for controls for most age intervals of sunburn, sunbathing vacations, and solarium use. Differences in odds ratio estimates of melanoma based on prospective and retrospective measurements indicate measurement error that is difficult to characterize. The authors conclude that indications of recall bias were found in this sample of Norwegian women, but that the results were inconsistent for the different exposures.
引用
收藏
页码:257 / 266
页数:10
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
Altman DG, 2000, Statistics with confidence, V2nd
[2]   A multicentre epidemiological study on sunbed use and cutaneous melanoma in Europe [J].
Bataille, W ;
Boniol, M ;
De Vries, E ;
Severi, G ;
Brandberg, Y ;
Sasieni, P ;
Cuzick, J ;
Eggermont, A ;
Ringborg, U ;
Grivegnée, AR ;
Coebergh, JW ;
Chignol, MC ;
Doré, JF ;
Autier, P .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2005, 41 (14) :2141-2149
[3]   Interval estimation for a binomial proportion - Comment - Rejoinder [J].
Brown, LD ;
Cai, TT ;
DasGupta, A ;
Agresti, A ;
Coull, BA ;
Casella, G ;
Corcoran, C ;
Mehta, C ;
Ghosh, M ;
Santner, TJ ;
Brown, LD ;
Cai, TT ;
DasGupta, A .
STATISTICAL SCIENCE, 2001, 16 (02) :101-133
[4]  
Carroll J., 2006, MEASUREMENT ERROR NO, V2nd edn, DOI DOI 10.1201/9781420010138
[5]   Risk factors and individual probabilities of melanoma for whites [J].
Cho, E ;
Rosner, BA ;
Feskanich, D ;
Colditz, GA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2005, 23 (12) :2669-2675
[6]   Recall bias in self-reported melanoma risk factors [J].
Cockburn, M ;
Hamilton, A ;
Mack, T .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2001, 153 (10) :1021-1026
[7]   RECALL BIAS IN EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES [J].
COUGHLIN, SS .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1990, 43 (01) :87-91
[8]   Public awareness about risk factors could pose problems for case-control studies:: The example of sunbed use and cutaneous melanoma [J].
de Vries, E ;
Boniol, M ;
Severi, G ;
Eggermont, AMM ;
Autier, P ;
Bataille, V ;
Doré, JF ;
Coebergh, JWW .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2005, 41 (14) :2150-2154
[9]   External validity in a population-based national prospective study - the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study (NOWAC) [J].
Eiliv, L ;
Merethe, K ;
Tonje, B ;
Anette, H ;
Kjersti, B ;
Elise, E ;
Torhild, GI .
CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL, 2003, 14 (10) :1001-1008
[10]   SITE-SPECIFIC MELANOCYTIC NEVUS COUNTS AS PREDICTORS OF WHOLE-BODY NAEVI [J].
ENGLISH, JSC ;
SWERDLOW, AJ ;
MACKIE, RM ;
ODOHERTY, CJ ;
HUNTER, JAA ;
CLARK, J ;
HOLE, DJ .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY, 1988, 118 (05) :641-644