Agreement between self-reports and medical records was only fair in a cross-sectional study of performance of annual eye examinations among adults with diabetes in managed care

Medical Care

Volumn 45, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 876-883

  Beckles, Gloria L A ^a   Williamson, David F ^a   Brown, Arleen F ^b   Gregg, Edward W ^a   Karter, Andrew J ^c   Kim, Catherine ^d   Dudley, R Adams ^e   Safford, Monika M ^f   Stevens, Mark R ^a   Thompson, Theodore J ^a  

^a NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHRONIC DISEASE PREVENTION AND HEALTH PROMOTION   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c DIVISION OF RESEARCH   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^f University of Alabama at Birmingham   (United States)

Author keywords

Agreement; Diabetes mellitus; Medical records; Quality indicators; Self report

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD; MIDDLE AGED; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SELF DISCLOSURE; STANDARD; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ADULT; AGED; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; DIABETIC RETINOPATHY; DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, ROUTINE; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MANAGED CARE PROGRAMS; MEDICAL RECORDS; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SELF DISCLOSURE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34548103802     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3180ca95fa     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Cowie CC, Rust KF, Byrd-Holt DD, et al. Prevalence of diabetes and impaired fasting glucose in adults in the U.S. population. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:1263-1268.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Fact Sheet. United States, 2005. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2005. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/factsheet05.htm. Accessed July, 2006.
3. Boyle JP, Honeycutt AA, Venkat Narayan KM, et al. Projection of diabetes burden through 2050. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:936-940.
4. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977-986.
5. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Intensive blood glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 33. Lancet. 1998;352:837-853.
6. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38. BMJ. 1998;31:703-713.
7. Goldberg RB, Mellies MJ, Sacks FM, et al. Cardiovascular events and their reduction with pravastatin in diabetic and glucose-intolerant myocardial infarction survivors with average cholesterol levels: subgroup analysis in the cholesterol and recurrent events (CARE) trial. Circulation. 1998;98:2513-2519.
8. Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Early photocoagulation for diabetic retinopathy. Ophthalmology. 1991;98:766-785.
9. Litzelman DK, Slemenda CW, Langefeld CD, et al. Reduction of lower extremity clinical abnormalities in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. A randomized controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:36-41.
10. McCabe CJ, Stevenson RC, Dolan AM. Evaluation of a diabetic foot screening and protection programme. Diabet Med. 1998;15:80-84.
11. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. Lifetime benefits and costs of intensive therapy as practiced in the diabetes control and complications trial. JAMA. 1996;276:1409-1415.
12. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Cost-effectiveness analysis of improved blood pressure control in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 40. BMJ. 1998;317:720-726.
13. Jonsson B, Cook JR, Pedersen TR. The cost-effectiveness of lipid lowering in patients with diabetes: results from the 4S trial. Diabetologia. 1999;42:1293-1301.
14. Javitt JC, Aiello LP, Chiang Y, et al. Preventive eye care in people with diabetes is cost-saving to the federal government. Implications for health care reform. Diabetes Care. 1994;17:909-917.
15. Siegel JE, Krolewski AS, Warram JH, et al. Cost-effectiveness of screening and early treatment of nephropathy in persons with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1992;3(4 Suppl):S111-S119.
16. Brechner RJ, Cowie CC, Howie LJ, et al. Ophthalmic examination among adults with diagnosed diabetes mellitus. JAMA. 1993;270:1714-1718.
17. Beckles GLA, Engelgau MM, Narayan KMV, et al. A population-based assessment of the level of care among adults with diabetes in the US. Diabetes Care. 1998;21:1432-1438.
18. Jencks SF, Cuerdon T, Burwen DR, et al. Quality of care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries: a profile at state and national levels. JAMA. 2000;284:1670-1676.
19. Saaddine JB, Engelgau MM, Beckles GL, et al. A diabetes report card for the United States: quality of care in the 1990s. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:565-574.
20. Arday DR, Fleming BB, Keller DK, et al. Variation in diabetes care among states. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:2230-2237.
21. Fleming BB, Greenfield S, Engelgau MM, et al. for the DQIP Group. The diabetes quality improvement project. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:1815-1820.
22. ALLIANCE. National Diabetes Quality Improvement Alliance. Performance measurement set for adults with diabetes. Available at: http://www. nationaldiabetesalliance.org. Accessed June 15, 2005.
23. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Preventive care practices among persons with diabetes - United States, 1995 and 2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002;51:965-969.
24. AHRQ. National Healthcare Quality Report. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/nhqr03/nhqrsum03.htm. Accessed January, 2004.
25. Newell SA, Girgis A, Sanson-Fisher RW, et al. The accuracy of self-reported health behaviors and risk factors relating to cancer and cardiovascular disease in the general population. A critical review. Am J Prev Med. 1999;17:211-229.
26. Aaronson LS, Burman ME. Use of health records in research: reliability and validity issues. Res Nurs Health. 1994;17:67-73.
27. Luck J, Peabody JW, Dresselhaus TR, et al. How well does chart abstraction measure quality? A prospective comparison of standardized patients with the medical record. Am J Med. 2000;108:642-649.
28. Neubebauer R, Ng S. Differential recall as a source of bias in epidemiological research. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43:1337-1341.
29. Walker EA, Zybert PA, Basch CE. What is the sensitivity and specificity of self-report for retinopathy screening? Diabetes Care. 2002;25:933-934.
30. Michael S, Woodruff S, Leff M, et al. Assessing diabetes care in a managed care organization: a comparison of methods. Diabetes. 1996;45(Suppl 2):145A.
31. Harwell TS, Moore K, Madison M, et al. Comparing self-reported measures of diabetes care with similar measures from a chart audit in a well-defined population. Am J Med Qual. 2001;16:3-8.
32. Fowles JB, Rosheim K, Fowler EJ, et al. The validity of self-reported diabetes quality of care measures. Int J Qual Health Care. 1999;11:407-412.
33. Thompson BL, O'Connor P, Boyle R, et al. Measuring clinical performance: comparison and validity of telephone survey and administrative data. Health Serv Res. 2001;36:813-825.
34. Bloom SA, Harris JR, Thompson BL, et al. Tracking preventive service use: a comparison of the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set with the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Med Care. 2000;38:187-194.
35. TRIAD Study Group. The Translating Research into Action for Diabetes (TRIAD) study. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:386-389.
36. Bradburn NM, Rips LJ, Shevell SK. Answering autobiographical questions: the impact of memory and inference on surveys. Science. 1987;236:157-161.
37. Barsky AJ. Forgetting, fabricating, and telescoping. The instability of medical history. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:981-984.
38. O'Toole B, Battisutta D, Long A, et al. Comparison of costs and data quality of three health survey methods: mail, telephone and personal home interview. Am J Epidemiol. 1986;124:317-328.
39. McHorney CA, Kosinski M, Ware JE. Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: results from a national survey. Med Care. 1994;32:551-567.
40. Peabody JW, Luck J, Glassman P, et al. Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction. JAMA. 2000;283:1715-1722.
41. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20:37-46.
42. Landis JR, Koch G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-174.
43. Lipsitz SR, Williamson J, Klar N, et al. A simple method for estimating a regression model for κ between a pair of raters. J R Stat Soc A. 2001;164:449-465.
44. Volk RJ, Cass AR. The accuracy of primary care patients' self-reports of prostate-specific antigen testing. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22:56-58.
45. Zapka JG, Bigelow C, Hurley T, et al. Mammography use among sociodemographically diverse women: the accuracy of self-report. Am J Public Health. 1996;86:1016-1021.
46. Jordan TR, Price JH, King KA, et al. The validity of male patients' self-reports regarding prostate cancer screening. Prev Med. 1999;28:297-303.
47. McGovern PG, Lurie N, Margolis KL, et al. Accuracy of self-report of mammography and pap smear in a low-income urban population. Am J Prev Med. 1998;14:201-208.
48. Baier M, Calonge N, Cutter G, et al. Validity of self-reported colorectal cancer screening behavior. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2000;9:229-232.
49. Ward MM, Yankey JW, Vaughn TE, et al. Physician process and patient outcome measures for diabetes care: relationships to organizational characteristics. Med Care. 2004;42:840-850.
50. Fleming B, Silver A, Ocepek-Welikson K, et al. The relationship between organizational systems and clinical quality in diabetes care. Am J Manag Care. 2004;10:934-944.