Cited by 1Spondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsSurvey Methodology and NonresponseMedical Coding and Health Information

Discrepancies Between Patient Recall and the Medical Record: Potential Impact on Diagnosis and Clinical Assessment of Chronic Disease

Boyer, Georgiana S.·1995·Archives of Internal Medicine

Abstract

Background During a case-control study, data necessary for fulfilling diagnostic and classification criteria for spondyloarthropathy were collected from 121 patients. Objective To study the potential impact of differences between patient recall and the medical record on diagnosis and clinical characterization of spondyloarthropathy as a model of chronic disease. Methods The study was conducted among four Alaskan Eskimo populations served by the Alaska Native Health Service. Two sets of historical data were compiled for each subject, one acquired during the interview and the other derived from the medical record. Paired items from the interview and the medical record were analyzed to determine discrepancies and consequent effects on diagnosis, classification, and disease characterization. Results Significant differences were observed in the reporting of genitourinary or diarrheal illnesses preceding or associated with arthritis, the occurrence of eye inflammation in association with joint pain, the occurrence of joint pain and back pain together, and the age at onset of back pain all of which are important to the diagnosis and classification of spondyloarthropathy. In contrast, for information needed to establish the probable inflammatory nature of back pain, patient interview was more helpful than the medical records, which did not provide adequate details to differentiate inflammatory from mechanical back pain. Conclusions Patient recall bias can substantially affect diagnos…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archinte.1995.00430170060007

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recall and reporting errors may have occurred, especially when remembering details of medical events such as treatments, procedures, and days lost from work.

    “Recall and reporting errors may have also occurred, especially when trying to remember the details of medical events (when did they occur, what were the costs), such as treatments, procedures, and days lost from work (41-43).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boyer, G. S.
Corresponding author
Boyer, Georgiana S.
Venue
Archives of Internal Medicine
Published
1995-09-25
Volume
155
Issue
17
Pages
1868
ISSN
0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7214193337
Cited by
1
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Archives of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Spondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
Keywords
spondyloarthritis, case-control study, chronic disease diagnosis, disease classification, back pain, inflammatory back pain, ocular inflammation, joint pain, Alaska Native populations, Alaskan Eskimos

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review