Functional abilities and continence: The use of proxy respondents in research involving older people

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 9, Issue 10, 2000, Pages 1117-1126

  Shaw, Chris ^a,b   McColl, Elaine ^a   Bond, Senga ^a  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Elderly; Fractured neck of femur; Proxy respondents; Reliability

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONTINENCE; CUSTODY; ELDERLY CARE; FECES INCONTINENCE; FEMALE; FEMUR NECK FRACTURE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; URINE INCONTINENCE;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FECAL INCONTINENCE; FEMALE; FEMORAL NECK FRACTURES; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; PATIENT SELECTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREVALENCE; PROXY; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URINARY INCONTINENCE;

EID: 0034444669     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1016660724376     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. 1. Nelson LM, Longstreth WT, Koepsell TD, van Belle G. Proxy respondents in epidemiologic research. Epidemiol Rev 1990; 12: 71-86.
2. 2. Magaziner J, Zimmerman SI, Gruber-Baldini AL, Hebel JR, Fox KM. Proxy reporting in five areas of functional status. Am J Epidemiol 1997; 146(5): 418-428.
3. 3. Gregson BA, Smith M, Lecouturier J, Rousseau N, Rodgers H, Bond J. Issues of recruitment and maintaining high response rates in a longitudinal study of older hospital patients in England - pathways through care study. J Epidemiol Commun Health 1997; 51: 541-548.
4. 4. Pickle LW, Brown LM, Blot WJ. Information available from surrogate respondents in case-control interview studies. Am J Epidemiol 1983; 118: 99-108.
5. 5. Magaziner J, Simonsick EM, Kashner TM, Hevel JR. Patient-proxy response comparability on measures of patient health and functional status. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41: 1065-1074.
6. 6. Epstein AM, Hall JA, Tognetti J, Son SH, Conant L. Using proxies to evaluate quality of life: Can they provide valid information about patients' health status and satisfaction with medical care? Med Care 1989; 27(3) (Suppl): 91-98.
7. 7. Magaziner J, Bassett SS, Hebel JR, Gruber-Baldini A. Use of proxies to measure health and functional status in epidemiologic studies of community dwelling women aged 65 years and older. Am J Epidemiol 1996; 143(3): 283-292.
8. 8. Bassett SS, Magaziner J, Hebel JR. Reliability of proxy response on mental health indices for aged, community-dwelling women. Psychol Aging 1990; 2: 127-132.
9. 9. Bond J, Brooks P, Carstairs V, Giles L. The reliability of a survey psychiatric assessment schedule for the elderly. Br J Psychiatry 1980; 137: 148-162.
10. 10. Bond J, Carstairs V. Services for the elderly: A survey of the characteristics and needs of a population of 5000 old people. Scottish Health Service Studies No. 42. Edinburgh: Scottish Home and Health Department, 1982.
11. 11. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales - a Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford: OUP, 1989.
12. 12. Cohen J. Weighted Kappa: Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull 1968; 70: 213-220.
13. 13. Brennan PF, Hays BJ. The Kappa statistic for establishing interrater reliability in the secondary analysis of qualitative clinical data. Res Nursing and Health 1992; 15: 153-158.
14. 14. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174.
15. 15. Poulter NR, Chang CL, Farley TMM, Marmot MG, on behalf of the World Health Organization Collaborative Study of Cardiovascular Disease and Steroid Hormone Contraception. Reliability of data from proxy respondents in an international case-control study of cardiovascular disease and oral contraceptives. J Epidemiol Commun Health 1996; 50: 674-680.
16. 16. Segal ME, Gillard M, Schall RR. Telephone and in-person proxy agreement between stroke patients and caregivers for the functional independence measure. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 75(3): 208-212.
17. 17. Sneeuw KCA, Aaronson NK, de Haan RJ, Limburg M. Assessing quality of life after stroke: The value and limitations of proxy ratings. Stroke 1997; 28(8): 1541-1549.
18. 18. Hakel MD. How often is often? Am Psychol 1968; 23: 533-534.