Using available family members as proxies to provide information on other family members who are difficult to reach

Family matters: Designing, analysing and understanding family based studies in life course epidemiology

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages

  Tomkins, Susannah ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Data collection; Face to face interviews; Family studies; Index participant; Life course epidemiology; Partner; Proxy informant; Secondary data collection; Spouse; Study design

Indexed keywords

EID: 84922760930     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199231034.003.0008     Document Type: Chapter

References (80)

1. Nelson LM, Longstreth WT, Jr., Koepsell TD, van Belle G. Proxy respondents in epidemiologic research. Epidemiologic Reviews 1990;12:71-86.
2. Burgio L and Leon J. Using patient and proxy reports as outcome measures in Alzheimer disease research. Alzheimer's Disease and Associated Disorders 1997;11:179-80.
3. Demissie S et al. Reliability of information collected by proxy in family studies of Alzheimer's disease. Neuroepidemiology 2001;20:105-11.
4. Debanne SM et al. On the use of surrogate respondents for controls in a case-control study of Alzheimer's disease. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2001;49:980-4.
5. Heyman A et al. Alzheimer's disease:a study of epidemiological aspects. Annals of Neurology 1984;15:335-41.
6. Friedland RP et al. Patients with Alzheimer's disease have reduced activities in midlife compared with healthy control-group members. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2001;98:3440-5.
7. Korten AE, Jorm AF, Henderson AS, McCusker E, Creasey H. Control-informant agreement on exposure history in case-control studies of Alzheimer's disease. Int ernational Journal of Epidemiology 1992;21:1121-31.
8. Kukull WA et al. Solvent exposure as a risk factor for Alzheimers disease -a case-control study. American Journal of Epidemiology 1995;141:1059-71.
9. Chong JP et al. Concordance of occupational and environmental exposure information elicited from patients with Alzheimer's disease and surrogate respondents. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 1989;15:73-89.
10. Logsdon RG and Teri L. Depression in Alzheimer's disease patients:caregivers as surrogate reporters. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1995;43:150-5.
11. Petot GJ et al. Use of surrogate respondents in a case control study of dietary risk factors for Alzheimer's disease. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 2002;102:848-50.
12. Loewenstein DA et al. Caregivers' judgments of the functional abilities of the Alzheimer's disease patient:a comparison of proxy reports and objective measures. Journal of Gerontology:Psychological Sciences 2001;56:78-84.
13. Novella JL et al. (2001). Agreement between patients' and proxies' reports of quality of life in Alzheimer's disease. Quality of life research 10, 443-452.
14. Weiss A, Fletcher AE, Palmer AJ, Nicholl CG, Bulpitt CJ. Use of surrogate respondents in studies of stroke and dementia. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1996;49:1187-94.
15. Dewey ME, Parker CJ, Analysis group of the MRC CFA STUDY. Survey into health problems of elderly people:multivariate analysis of concordance between self-report and proxy information. Int ernational Journal of Epidemiology 2000;29:698-703.
16. Farrow DC and Samet JM. Comparability of information provided by elderly cancer patients and surrogates regarding health and functional status, social network, and life events. Epidemiology 1990;1:370-6.
17. Long K, Sudha S, Mutran EJ. Elder-proxy agreement concerning the functional status and medical history of the older person:the impact of caregiver burden and depressive symptomatology. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1998;46:1103-11.
18. Magaziner J, Zimmerman SI, Gruber-Baldini AL, Hebel JR, Fox KM. Proxy reporting in five areas of functional status. Comparison with self-reports and observations of performance. American Journal of Epidemiology 1997;146:418-28.
19. Ostbye T, Tyas S, McDowell I, Koval J. Reported activities of daily living:Agreement between elderly subjects with and without dementia and their caregivers. Age and Ageing 1997;26:99-106.
20. Pierre U, Wood-Dauphinee S, Korner-Bitensky N, Gayton D, Hanley J. Proxy use of the Canadian SF-36 in rating health status of the disabled elderly. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1998;51:983-90.
21. Sitoh YY et al. Proxy assessment of health-related quality of life in the frail elderly. Age and Ageing 2003;32:459.
22. Rajmil L et al. Influence of proxy respondents in children's health interview surveys. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 1999;53:38-42.
23. Ravelli A et al. Discordance between proxy-reported and observed assessment of functional ability of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Rheumatology.(Oxford) 2001;40:914-19.
24. Ronen GM, Streiner DL, Rosenbaum P. Health-related quality of life in children with epilepsy:development and validation of self-report and parent proxy measures. Epilepsia 2003;44:598-612.
25. Golding J, Pembrey M, Jones R. ALSPAC-the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. I. Study methodology. Paediatr.Perinat.Epidemiol 2001;15:74-87.
26. Najman JM et al. Cohort Profile:The Mater-University of Queensland Study of Pregnancy (MUSP). Int J Epidemiol 2005;34:992-7.
27. Leon DA et al. Hazardous alcohol drinking and premature mortality in Russia:a population based case-control study. Lancet 2007;369:2001-9.
28. Gute DM and Fulton JP. Agreement of occupation and industry data on Rhode Island death certificates with two alternative sources of information. Public Health Rep 1985;100:65-72.
29. Schumacher MC. Comparison of occupation and industry information from death certificates and interviews. American Journal of Public Health 1986;76:635-7.
30. Schade WJ and Swanson GM. Comparison of death certificate occupation and industry data with lifetime occupational histories obtained by interview:variations in the accuracy of death certificate entries. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 1988;14:121-36.
31. Turner DW, Schumacher M.C., West DW. Comparison of occupational interview data to death certificate data in Utah. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 1987;12:145-51.
32. Gute G and Fulton J. Agreement of occupation and industry data on Rhode Island death certificates with two alternative sources of information. Public Health Rep 1985;100:65-72.
33. Schumacher M.C. Comparison of occupation and industry information from death certificates and interviews. American Journal of Public Health 1986;76:635-7.
34. Swanson GM, Schwartz AG, Burrows RW. An assessment of occupation and industry data from death certificates and hospital records for population-based cancer surveillance. American Journal of Public Health 1984;74:464-7.
35. Midanik LT. Validity of self-reported alcohol use:a literature review and assessment. British Journal of Addiction 1988;83:1019-30.
36. Tomkins, S. Proxy respondents in a case-control study:validity, reliability and impact. PhD thesis, London School of Hygiene &Tropical Medicine, University of London;2006.
37. Landis JR and Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74.
38. Midanik LT. Perspectives on the validity of self-reported alcohol use. British Journal of Addiction 1989;84:1419-23.
39. Midanik LT. The validity of self-reported alcohol consumption and alcohol problems:a literature review. British Journal of Addiction 1982;77:357-82.
40. Midanik LT. Over-reports of recent alcohol consumption in a clinical population:a validity study. Drug and Alcohol Dependency 1982;9:101-10.
41. Pernanen, K. Validity of survey data on alcohol use in Research advances in alcohol and drug problems, R. J. Gibbens, Ed. John Wiley &Son, Inc, New York, vol. 1, 1974.
42. Midanik LT. Drunkenness, feeling the effects and 5+ measures. Addiction 1999;94:887-97.
43. Midanik LT and Clark WB. The demographic distribution of US drinking patterns in 1990:description and trends from 1984. American Journal of Public Health 1994;84:1218-22.
44. Midanik LT. Reliability of self-reported alcohol consumption before and after December. Addictive Behaviour 1992;17:179-84.
45. Midanik LT, Klatsky AL, Armstrong MA. A comparison of 7-day recall with two summary measures of alcohol use. Drug and Alcohol Dependency 1984;24:127-34.
46. Barnett T, O'Loughlin J, Paradis G, Renaud L. Reliability of proxy reports of parental smoking by elementary schoolchildren. Annals of Epidemiology 1997;7:396-9.
47. Gilpin EA et al. Estimates of population smoking prevalence:self-vs proxy reports of smoking status. American Journal of Public Health 1994;84:1576-9.
48. Greenberg RS, LIFF JM, Gregory HR, Brockman JE. The use of interviews with surrogate respondents in a case-control study of oral cancer. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine 1986;59:497-504.
49. Kolonel LN, Hirohata T, Nomura AM. Adequacy of survey data collected from substitute respondents. American Journal of Epidemiology 1977;106:476-84.
50. Lerchen ML and Samet JM. An assessment of the validity of questionnaire responses provided by a surviving spouse. American Journal of Epidemiology 1986;123:481-9.
51. McLaughlin JK, Mandel JS, Mehl ES, Blot WJ. Comparison of next-of-kin with self-respondents regarding questions on cigarette, coffee, and alcohol consumption. Epidemiology 1990;1:408-12.
52. McLaughlin JK, Dietz MS, Mehl ES, Blot WJ. Reliability of surrogate information on cigarette smoking by type of informant. American Journal of Epidemiology 1987;126:144-6.
53. Metzner HL, Lamphiear DE, Thompson FE, Oh MS, Hawthorne VM. Comparison of surrogate and subject reports of dietary practices, smoking habits and weight among married couples in the Tecumseh Diet Methodology Study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1989;42:367-75.
54. Navarro AM. Smoking status by proxy and self report:rate of agreement in different ethnic groups. Tobacco Control 1999;8:182-5.
55. Nelson LM, Longstreth WT, Jr., Koepsell TD, Checkoway H, van Belle G. Completeness and accuracy of interview data from proxy respondents:demographic, medical, and life-style factors. Epidemiology 1994;5:204-17.
56. Passaro KT, Noss J, Savitz DA, Little RE. Agreement between self and partner reports of paternal drinking and smoking. International Journal of Epidemiology 1997;26:315-20.
57. Pickle LW, Brown LM, Blot WJ. Information available from surrogate respondents in case-control interview studies. American Journal of Epidemiology 1983;118:99-108.
58. Thorogood M and Vessey M. The reliability of surrogate information about oral contraceptive use, smoking, height and weight collected from men about their wives. Contraception 1989;39:401-8.
59. Woo JG and Pinney SM. Retrospective smoking history data collection for deceased workers:completeness and accuracy of surrogate reports. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2002;44:915-23.
60. Graham P and Jackson R. Primary versus proxy respondents:comparability of questionnaire data on alcohol consumption. American Journal of Epidemiology 1993;138:443-52.
61. Hatch MC, Misra D, Kabat GC, Kartzmer S. Proxy respondents in reproductive research:a comparison of selfand partner-reported data. American Journal of Epidemiology 1991;133:826-31.
62. Hamilton AS and Mack TM. Use of twins as mutual proxy respondents in a case-control study of breast cancer:effect of item nonresponse and misclassification. Am J Epidemil 2000;152:1093-1103.
63. Graham P and Jackson R. A comparison of primary and proxy respondent reports of habitual physical activity, using kappa statistics and log-linear models. Journal of Epidemiology and Biostatics 2000;5:255-65.
64. Batty GD, Lawlor DA, Macintyre S, Clark H, Leon DA. Accuracy of adults' recall of childhood social class:findings from the Aberdeen children of the 1950s study. J.Epidemiol.Community Health 2005;59:898-903.
65. Lien N, Friestad C, Klepp KI. Adolescents' proxy reports of parents' socioeconomic status:How valid are they? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2001;55:731-7.
66. Shaw C, McColl E, Bond S. Functional abilities and continence:the use of proxy respondents in research involving older people. Quality of Life Research 2000;9:1117-26.
67. Tepper S, Beatty P, DeJong G. Outcomes in traumatic brain injury:self-report versus report of significant others. Brain Injury 1996;10:575-81.
68. Halabi S, Zurayk H, Awaida R, Darwish M, Saab B. Reliability and validity of self and proxy reporting of morbidity data:a case study from Beirut, Lebanon. Int ernational Journal of Epidemiology 1992;21:607-12.
69. 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. American Journal of Epidemiology 1996;143:283-92.
70. Conner KR, Conwell Y, Duberstein PR. The validity of proxy-based data in suicide research:a study of patients 50 years of age and older who attempted suicide. II. Life events, social support and suicidal behavior. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavia 2001;104:452-7.
71. Conner KR, Duberstein PR, Conwell Y. The validity of proxy-based data in suicide research:a study of patients 50 years of age and older who attempted suicide. I. Psychiatric diagnoses. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavia 2001;104:204-9.
72. Herrmann N. Retrospective information from questionnaires. I. Comparability of primary respondents and their next-of-kin. American Journal of Epidemiology 1985;121:937-47.
73. Hislop TG, Coldman AJ, Zheng YY, Ng VT, Labo T. Reliability of dietary information from surrogate respondents. Nutr Cancer 1992;18:123-9.
74. Humble CG, Samet JM, Skipper BE. Comparison of self-and surrogate-reported dietary information. American Journal of Epidemiology 1984;119:86-98.
75. Wadsworth M, Kuh D, Richards M, Hardy R. Cohort Profile:The 1946 National Birth Cohort (MRC National Survey of Health and Development). Int ernational Journal of Epidemiology 2006;35:49-54.
76. Magaziner J, Simonsick EM, Kashner TM, Hebel JR. Patient-proxy response comparability on measures of patient health and functional status. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1988;41:1065-74.
77. The Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study. Survey into health problems of elderly people:multivariate analysis of concordance between self-report and proxy information. Int ernational Journal of Epidemiology 2000;29:698-703.
78. Boyle CA and Brann EA. Proxy respondents and the validity of occupational and other exposure data. The Selected Cancers Cooperative Study Group. American Journal of Epidemiology 1992;136:712-21.
79. Marshall J, Priore R, Haughey B, Rzepka T, Graham S. Spouse-subject interviews and the reliability of diet studies. American Journal of Epidemiology 1980;112:675-83.
80. Mills KM et al. Reliability of proxy-reported and self-reported household appliance use. Epidemiology 2000;11:581-8.