Reliability of proxy reports of parental smoking by elementary schoolchildren

Annals of Epidemiology

Volumn 7, Issue 6, 1997, Pages 396-399

  Barnett, Tracie ^a   O'Loughlin, Jennifer ^a,b   Paradis, Gilles ^a,b   Renaud, Lise ^a,c  

^a MONTREAL GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adolescent; Children; Epidemiologic Methods; Proxy Respondents; Reliability; Smoking

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CHILD; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MOTHER CHILD RELATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SCHOOL CHILD; SELF REPORT; SMOKING;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHILD; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; PARENTS; PREVALENCE; QUEBEC; SELF DISCLOSURE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SMOKING;

EID: 0030738162     PISSN: 10472797     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1047-2797(97)00045-8     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Nelson LM, Longstreth WT Jr, Koepsell TD, et al. Proxy respondents in epidemiological research. Epidemiol Rev. 1990;12:71-86.
2. Boyle CA, Brann EA. Proxy respondents and the validity of occupational and other exposure data. Am J Epidemiol. 1992;136:712-721.
3. Hatch MC, Misra D, Kabat GC, et al. Proxy respondents in reproductive research: A comparison of self and partner reported data. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;133:826-831.
4. Schnitzer PG, Olshan AF, Savitz DA, Erickson JD. Validity of mother's report of father's occupation in a study of paternal occupation and congenital malformations. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;141:872-877.
5. Gilpin EA, Pierce JP, Cavin SW, et al. Estimates of population smoking prevalence: Self vs proxy reports of smoking status. Am J Public Health. 1994;84:1576-1579.
6. Nelson LM, Longstreth WT, Koepsell TD, et al. Completeness and accuracy of interview data from proxy respondents: Demographic, medical and life-style factors. Epidemiology. 1994;5:204-217.
7. Lyon JL, Egger MJ, Robinson, et al. Misclassification of exposure in case-control study: The effects of different types of exposure and different proxy respondents in a study of pancreatic cancer. Epidemiology. 1992;3:223-231.
8. Renaud L, Dufour R, O'Loughlin J. Intervenir localement selon les cinq axes de la Charte d'Ottawa: Défi de la promotion de la santé. Ruptures. 1997;4:23-34-
9. Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley; 1981.
10. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT User's Guide Release. 603 ed. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 1988.
11. Graham P, Jackson R. The analysis of ordinal agreement data: Beyond weighted kappa. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46:1055-1062.
12. Block DA, Kraemer HC. 2X2 Kappa coefficients: Measures of agreement or association. Biometrics. 1989;45:269-287.
13. Murray RP, Connet JE, Lauger GG, Voelker HT. Error in smoking measures: Effects of intervention on relations of cotinine and carbon monoxide to self-reported smoking. The Lung Health Study Research Group. Am J Public Health. 1993;83(9):1251-1257.
14. Wagenknecht LE, Burke GL, Perkins LL, et al. Misclassification of smoking status in the CARDIA study: A comparison of self-report with serum cotinine levels. Am J Public Health. 1992;82(1):33-36.
15. Gasgow RE, Mullooly J, Vogt TM, et al. Biochemical validation of smoking status. Pros, cons, and data from four low-intensity intervention trials. Addict Behavior. 1993;18:209-216
16. Velicer WF, Prochaska JO, Rossi JS, Snow MG. Assessing outcome in smoking cessation studies. Psychol Bull. 1992;111:23-41.
17. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Benefits of Smoking Cessation: A report of the Surgeon General (DHHS Publication No. CDC 90-8416). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1990.