Dataset Information

Accuracy of self-reported nevus and pigmentation phenotype compared with clinical assessment in a population-based study of young Australian adults.

ABSTRACT: Awareness of individual risk may encourage improved prevention and early detection of melanoma.We evaluated the accuracy of self-reported pigmentation and nevus phenotype compared with clinical assessment, and examined agreement between nevus counts from selected anatomical regions. The sample included 456 cases with invasive cutaneous melanoma diagnosed between ages 18 to 39 years and 538 controls from the population-based Australian Melanoma Family Study. Participants completed a questionnaire about their pigmentation and nevus phenotype, and attended a dermatologic skin examination.There was strong agreement between self-reported and clinical assessment of eye color [?, = 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74-0.81]; and moderate agreement for hair color (? = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.42-0.50). Agreement between self-reported skin color and spectrophotometer-derived measurements was poor (? = 0.12; 95% CI, 0.08-0.16) to moderate (Spearman correlation rs = -0.37; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.42). Participants tended to underestimate their nevus counts and pigmentation; men were more likely to underreport their skin color. The rs was 0.43 (95% CI, 0.38-0.49) comparing clinical total body nevus counts with self-reported nevus categories. There was good agreement between total body nevus counts and site-specific nevus counts, particularly on both arms.Young adults have suboptimal accuracy when assessing important risk characteristics including nevus numbers and pigmentation. Measuring nevus count on the arms is a good predictor of full body nevus count.These results have implications for the likely success of targeted public health programs that rely on self-assessment of these factors.

SUBMITTER: Cust AE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4698346 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Accuracy of self-reported nevus and pigmentation phenotype compared with clinical assessment in a population-based study of young Australian adults.

Cust Anne E AE Pickles Kristen M KM Goumas Chris C Vu Thao T Schmid Helen H Nagore Eduardo E Kelly John J Aitken Joanne F JF Giles Graham G GG Hopper John L JL Jenkins Mark A MA Mann Graham J GJ

Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology 20150127 4

<h4>Background</h4>Awareness of individual risk may encourage improved prevention and early detection of melanoma.<h4>Methods</h4>We evaluated the accuracy of self-reported pigmentation and nevus phenotype compared with clinical assessment, and examined agreement between nevus counts from selected anatomical regions. The sample included 456 cases with invasive cutaneous melanoma diagnosed between ages 18 to 39 years and 538 controls from the population-based Australian Melanoma Family Study. Par ...[more]

PMID: 25628333

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe accuracy of self-reported vaccination status is important to guide real-world vaccine effectiveness studies and policy making in jurisdictions where access to electronic vaccine registries is restricted.ObjectiveThis study aimed to determine the accuracy of self-reported vaccination status and reliability of the self-reported number of doses, brand, and time of vaccine administration.MethodsThis diagnostic accuracy study was completed by the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network. We enrolled consecutive patients presenting to 4 emergency departments (EDs) in Québec between March 24, 2020, and December 25, 2021. We included adult patients who were able to consent, could speak English or French, and had a proven COVID-19 infection. We compared the self-reported vaccination status of the patients with their vaccination status in the electronic Québec Vaccination Registry. Our primary outcome was the accuracy of the self-reported vaccination status (index test) ascertained during telephone follow-up compared with the Québec Vaccination Registry (reference standard). The accuracy was calculated by dividing all correctly self-reported vaccinated and unvaccinated participants by the sum of all correctly and incorrectly self-reported vaccinated and unvaccinated participants. We also reported interrater agreement with the reference standard as measured by unweighted Cohen κ for self-reported vaccination status at telephone follow-up and at the time of their index ED visit, number of vaccine doses, and brand.ResultsDuring the study period, we included 1361 participants. At the time of the follow-up interview, 932 participants reported at least 1 dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. The accuracy of the self-reported vaccination status was 96% (95% CI 95%-97%). Cohen κ for self-reported vaccination status at phone follow-up was 0.91 (95% CI 0.89-0.93) and 0.85 (95% CI 0.77-0.92) at the time of their index ED visit. Cohen κ was 0.89 (95% CI 0.87-0.91) for the number of doses, 0.80 (95% CI 0.75-0.84) for the brand of the first dose, 0.76 (95% CI 0.70-0.83) for the brand of the second dose, and 0.59 (95% CI 0.34-0.83) for the brand of the third dose.ConclusionsWe reported a high accuracy of self-reported vaccination status for adult patients without cognitive disorders who can express themselves in English or French. Researchers can use self-reported COVID-19 vaccination data on the number of doses received, vaccine brand name, and timing of vaccination to guide future research with patients who are capable of self-reporting their vaccination data. However, access to official electronic vaccine registries is still needed to determine the vaccination status in certain susceptible populations where self-reported vaccination data remain missing or impossible to obtain.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT04702945; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04702945.

Project description:To describe the accuracy of ethnicity coding in contemporary National Health Service (NHS) hospital records compared with the 'gold standard' of self-reported ethnicity. Secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional survey (2011). All NHS hospitals in England providing cancer treatment. 58 721 patients with cancer for whom ethnicity information (Office for National Statistics 2001 16-group classification) was available from self-reports (considered to represent the 'gold standard') and their hospital record. We calculated the sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of hospital record ethnicity. Further, we used a logistic regression model to explore independent predictors of discordance between recorded and self-reported ethnicity. Overall, 4.9% (4.7-5.1%) of people had their self-reported ethnic group incorrectly recorded in their hospital records. Recorded White British ethnicity had high sensitivity (97.8% (97.7-98.0%)) and PPV (98.1% (98.0-98.2%)) for self-reported White British ethnicity. Recorded ethnicity information for the 15 other ethnic groups was substantially less accurate with 41.2% (39.7-42.7%) incorrect. Recorded 'Mixed' ethnicity had low sensitivity (12-31%) and PPVs (12-42%). Recorded 'Indian', 'Chinese', 'Black-Caribbean' and 'Black African' ethnic groups had intermediate levels of sensitivity (65-80%) and PPV (80-89%, respectively). In multivariable analysis, belonging to an ethnic minority group was the only independent predictor of discordant ethnicity information. There was strong evidence that the degree of discordance of ethnicity information varied substantially between different hospitals (p<0.0001). Current levels of accuracy of ethnicity information in NHS hospital records support valid profiling of White/non-White ethnic differences. However, profiling of ethnic differences in process or outcome measures for specific minority groups may contain a substantial and variable degree of misclassification error. These considerations should be taken into account when interpreting ethnic variation audits based on routine data and inform initiatives aimed at improving the accuracy of ethnicity information in hospital records.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Web-based self-report surveying has increased in popularity, as it can rapidly yield large samples at a low cost. Despite this increase in popularity, in the area of youth mental health, there is a distinct lack of research comparing the results of Web-based self-report surveys with the more traditional and widely accepted computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI). OBJECTIVE:The Second Australian Young and Well National Survey 2014 sought to compare differences in respondent response patterns using matched items on CATI versus a Web-based self-report survey. The aim of this study was to examine whether responses varied as a result of item sensitivity, that is, the item's susceptibility to exaggeration on underreporting and to assess whether certain subgroups demonstrated this effect to a greater extent. METHODS:A subsample of young people aged 16 to 25 years (N=101), recruited through the Second Australian Young and Well National Survey 2014, completed the identical items on two occasions: via CATI and via Web-based self-report survey. Respondents also rated perceived item sensitivity. RESULTS:When comparing CATI with the Web-based self-report survey, a Wilcoxon signed-rank analysis showed that respondents answered 14 of the 42 matched items in a significantly different way. Significant variation in responses (CATI vs Web-based) was more frequent if the item was also rated by the respondents as highly sensitive in nature. Specifically, 63% (5/8) of the high sensitivity items, 43% (3/7) of the neutral sensitivity items, and 0% (0/4) of the low sensitivity items were answered in a significantly different manner by respondents when comparing their matched CATI and Web-based question responses. The items that were perceived as highly sensitive by respondents and demonstrated response variability included the following: sexting activities, body image concerns, experience of diagnosis, and suicidal ideation. For high sensitivity items, a regression analysis showed respondents who were male (beta=-.19, P=.048) or who were not in employment, education, or training (NEET; beta=-.32, P=.001) were significantly more likely to provide different responses on matched items when responding in the CATI as compared with the Web-based self-report survey. The Web-based self-report survey, however, demonstrated some evidence of avidity and attrition bias. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with CATI, Web-based self-report surveys are highly cost-effective and had higher rates of self-disclosure on sensitive items, particularly for respondents who identify as male and NEET. A drawback to Web-based surveying methodologies, however, includes the limited control over avidity bias and the greater incidence of attrition bias. These findings have important implications for further development of survey methods in the area of health and well-being, especially when considering research topics (in this case diagnosis, suicidal ideation, sexting, and body image) and groups that are being recruited (young people, males, and NEET).

Project description:A current concern in genetic epidemiology studies in admixed populations is that population stratification can lead to spurious results. The Brazilian census classifies individuals according to self-reported "color", but several studies have demonstrated that stratifying according to "color" is not a useful strategy to control for population structure, due to the dissociation between self-reported "color" and genomic ancestry. We report the results of a study in a group of Brazilian siblings in which we measured skin pigmentation using a reflectometer, and estimated genomic ancestry using 21 Ancestry Informative Markers (AIMs). Self-reported "color", according to the Brazilian census, was also available for each participant. This made it possible to evaluate the relationship between self-reported "color" and skin pigmentation, self-reported "color" and genomic ancestry, and skin pigmentation and genomic ancestry. We observed that, although there were significant differences between the three "color" groups in genomic ancestry and skin pigmentation, there was considerable dispersion within each group and substantial overlap between groups. We also saw that there was no good agreement between the "color" categories reported by each member of the sibling pair: 30 out of 86 sibling pairs reported different "color", and in some cases, the sibling reporting the darker "color" category had lighter skin pigmentation. Socioeconomic status was significantly associated with self-reported "color" and genomic ancestry in this sample. This and other studies show that subjective classifications based on self-reported "color", such as the one that is used in the Brazilian census, are inadequate to describe the population structure present in recently admixed populations. Finally, we observed that one of the AIMs included in the panel (rs1426654), which is located in the known pigmentation gene SLC24A5, was strongly associated with skin pigmentation in this sample.

Dataset Information

Accuracy of self-reported nevus and pigmentation phenotype compared with clinical assessment in a population-based study of young Australian adults.

Publications

Accuracy of self-reported nevus and pigmentation phenotype compared with clinical assessment in a population-based study of young Australian adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets