Cited by 270Mental Health Treatment and AccessSurvey Methodology and NonresponseStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Recall of Psychiatric History in Cross-sectional Surveys: Implications for Epidemiologic Research

Simon, Gregory E., VonKorff, Michael·1995·Epidemiologic Reviews

Abstract

Data from a variety of sources suggest the possibility of significant errors in lifetime recall of psychiatric illness. Remote episodes of illness may often be forgotten, especially among patients with milder or less recurrent illness or those who received no treatment. These errors in recall may lead to significant underestimation of true lifetime prevalence and may produce the appearance of large temporal increases in risk in the absence of any true change. When assessing lifetime history, cross-sectional surveys may differentially underestimate prevalence in the elderly and in those with less severe or recurrent illness. While lifetime risk of depression and other psychiatric disorders may not be increasing as rapidly as suggested by cross-sectional surveys, the overall impact of such disorders over the life span may be significantly greater than previous community surveys have indicated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.epirev.a036180

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?

  • Retrospective recall is associated with decreased reliability due to memory deterioration, hindsight and recall bias, and a tendency to overemphasize past events or underestimate past morbidity.

    “Retrospective recall is associated with decreased reliability as a result of memory deterioration, hindsight and recall bias, and a tendency to overemphasize past events, which provide an explanation for current problems (Hardt and Rutter, 2004) or underestimate past morbidity (Simon and VonKorff, 1995).”

    From Factors associated with recovery from anorexia nervosa (2013) · cites this paper as Simon and VonKorff, 1995

  • Retrospective recall entails sources of invalidity that limit inference about the developmental origins of adults with disorder.

    “Retrospective recall entails sources of invalidity that limit inference about the developmental origins of adults with disorder(15-17).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Simon, G. E., & VonKorff, M.
Affiliations
Group Health Cooperative (US)
Corresponding author
Simon, Gregory E.
Venue
Epidemiologic Reviews
Published
1995
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
221-227
ISSN
  • 0193-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-6729
OpenAlex
W1531843813
Cited by
269
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 13
FWCI
11.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Epidemiologic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Public Health Service (51338)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
lifetime prevalence, recall bias, cross-sectional survey, depression, mental illness, underestimation of prevalence, older adults, disease severity
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Medical History Taking, Mental Recall, Reproducibility of Results, Bias

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