Combining self-reported and objectively measured survey data to improve hypertension prevalence estimates: Portuguese experience
Open Access
- 8 April 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Archives of Public Health
- Vol. 79 (1), 1-9
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-021-00562-y
Abstract
Accurate data on hypertension is essential to inform decision-making. Hypertension prevalence may be underestimated by population-based surveys due to misclassification of health status by participants. Therefore, adjustment for misclassification bias is required when relying on self-reports. This study aims to quantify misclassification bias in self-reported hypertension prevalence and prevalence ratios in the Portuguese component of the European Health Interview Survey (INS2014), and illustrate application of multiple imputation (MIME) for bias correction using measured high blood pressure data from the first Portuguese health examination survey (INSEF). We assumed that objectively measured hypertension status was missing for INS2014 participants (n = 13,937) and imputed it using INSEF (n = 4910) as auxiliary data. Self-reported, objectively measured and MIME-corrected hypertension prevalence and prevalence ratios (PR) by sex, age group and education were estimated. Bias in self-reported and MIME-corrected estimates were computed using objectively measured INSEF data as a gold-standard. Self-reported INS2014 data underestimated hypertension prevalence in all population subgroups, with misclassification bias ranging from 5.2 to 18.6 percentage points (pp). After MIME-correction, prevalence estimates increased and became closer to objectively measured ones, with bias reduction to 0 pp - 5.7 pp. Compared to objectively measured INSEF, self-reported INS2014 data considerably underestimated prevalence ratio by sex (PR = 0.8, 95CI = [0.7, 0.9] vs. PR = 1.2, 95CI = [1.1, 1.4]). MIME successfully corrected direction of association with sex in bivariate (PR = 1.1, 95CI = [1.0, 1.3]) and multivariate analyses (PR = 1.2, 95CI = [1.0, 1.3]). Misclassification bias in hypertension prevalence ratios by education and age group were less pronounced and did not require correction in multivariate analyses. Our results highlight the importance of misclassification bias analysis in self-reported hypertension. Multiple imputation is a feasible approach to adjust for misclassification bias in prevalence estimates and exposure-outcomes associations in survey data.This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prevalence odds ratio versus prevalence ratio: choice comes with consequencesStatistics in Medicine, 2016
- Good practices for quantitative bias analysisInternational Journal of Epidemiology, 2014
- Under-estimation of obesity, hypertension and high cholesterol by self-reported data: comparison of self-reported information and objective measures from health examination surveysEuropean Journal of Public Health, 2014
- Prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension and salt intake in PortugalJournal of Hypertension, 2014
- Public health indicators for the EU: the joint action for ECHIM (European Community Health Indicators & Monitoring)Archives of Public Health, 2013
- Accounting for Misclassified Outcomes in Binary Regression Models Using Multiple Imputation With Internal Validation DataAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2013
- Hypertension: Development of a prediction model to adjust self-reported hypertension prevalence at the community levelBMC Health Services Research, 2012
- Improving on analyses of self‐reported data in a large‐scale health survey by using information from an examination‐based surveyStatistics in Medicine, 2010
- Multiple-imputation for measurement-error correctionInternational Journal of Epidemiology, 2006
- Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratioBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2003