Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 248

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is questionnaire information valid in the study of a chronic disease such as diabetes? The Nord-Trøndelag diabetes study.

Open access
Midthjell, K, Holmen, J, Bjørndal, A, Lund-Larsen, G·1992·Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE--The aim was to validate information about diabetes mellitus collected by questionnaire in a large epidemiological survey. DESIGN--Questions on diabetes diagnosis, medical treatment for diabetes, diabetes duration, and hypertension treatment were selected from the Nord-Trøndelag health survey questionnaires. One of the municipalities was selected for the validation study. SETTING--The health survey 1984-86 addressed all inhabitants > or = 20 years of age in Nord-Trøndelag county, Norway; 76,885 (90.3%) of the eligible population participated in answering the question on diabetes. PARTICIPANTS--All inhabitants in the municipality answering "yes" to the question on diabetes (n = 169) and the persons with the same sex born closest before and after each diabetic patient and answering "no" to the diabetes question (n = 338) were included. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS--A very thorough search was made in the medical files of the general practitioners in the municipality for corresponding information. Compared to the files, diabetes was verified in 163 out of the 169. The commonest cause of discrepancy was renal glycosuria. One out of the 338 registered non-diabetic persons was found to have diabetes. Diabetic patients tended to overestimate diabetes duration significantly. Insulin treatment was verified in 19/20 (95%) and treatment with oral hypoglycaemic agents in all 44 with an affirmative questionnaire answer. A negative answer on insulin and oral hypoglycaemic agents was verified in 100% and 99% respectively. CONCLUSIONS--The concordance was considerably higher than in a comparable Norwegian study performed 10 years earlier. Patient administered questionnaires may be a very reliable source of information for epidemiological purposes in a well defined chronic disease such as diabetes mellitus.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jech.46.5.537

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 248

Metadata

Authors
Midthjell, K., Holmen, J., Bjørndal, A., & Lund-Larsen, G.
Venue
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1992-10
Volume
46
Issue
5
Pages
537-542
ISSN
  • 0141-7681 (ISSN-L)
  • 0143-005X
  • 1470-2738
OpenAlex
W2164964744
Cited by
248
References
1
FWCI
16.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Is questionnaire information valid in the study of a chronic disease such as diabetes? The Nord-Trøndelag diabetes study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jech.46.5.537
The paper
Midthjell, K., Holmen, J., Bjørndal, A., & Lund-Larsen, G. (1992). Is questionnaire information valid in the study of a chronic disease such as diabetes? The Nord-Trøndelag diabetes study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.46.5.537

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.