Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Association between an individual housing-based socioeconomic index and inconsistent self-reporting of health conditions: a prospective cohort study in the Mayo Clinic Biobank
  1. Euijung Ryu1,
  2. Janet E Olson1,
  3. Young J Juhn2,
  4. Matthew A Hathcock1,
  5. Chung-Il Wi2,
  6. James R Cerhan1,
  7. Kathleen J Yost1,
  8. Paul Y Takahashi3
  1. 1 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
  2. 2 Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
  3. 3 Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Paul Y Takahashi; takahashi.paul{at}mayo.edu

Abstract

Objective Using surveys to collect self-reported information on health and disease is commonly used in clinical practice and epidemiological research. However, the inconsistency of self-reported information collected longitudinally in repeated surveys is not well investigated. We aimed to investigate whether a socioeconomic status based on current housing characteristics, HOUsing-based SocioEconomic Status (HOUSES) index linking current address information to real estate property data, is associated with inconsistent self-reporting.

Study setting and participants We performed a prospective cohort study using the Mayo Clinic Biobank (MCB) participants who resided in Olmsted County, Minnesota, USA, at the time of enrolment between 2009 and 2013, and were invited for a 4-year follow-up survey (n=11 717).

Primary and secondary outcome measures Using repeated survey data collected at the baseline and 4 years later, the primary outcome was the inconsistency in survey results when reporting prevalent diseases, defined by reporting to have ‘ever’ been diagnosed with a given disease in the baseline survey but reported ‘never’ in the follow-up survey. Secondary outcome was the response rate for the 4-year follow-up survey.

Results Among the MCB participants invited for the 4-year follow-up survey, 8508/11 717 (73%) responded to the survey. Forty-three per cent had at least one inconsistent self-reported disease. Lower HOUSES was associated with higher inconsistency rates, and the association remained significant after pertinent characteristics such as age and perceived general health (OR=1.46; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.84 for the lowest compared with the highest HOUSES decile). HOUSES was also associated with lower response rate for the follow-up survey (56% vs 77% for the lowest vs the highest HOUSES decile).

Conclusion This study demonstrates the importance of using the HOUSES index that reflects current SES when using self-reporting through repeated surveys, as the HOUSES index at baseline survey was inversely associated with inconsistent self-report and the response rate for the follow-up survey.

  • geriatric medicine
  • public health
  • social medicine

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors ER and PYT were responsible for the study design, initial manuscript drafting and interpretation of the results. JEO and JRC are the primary investigators for developing and maintaining the Mayo Clinic Biobank. The formulation of the HOUSES index was done by YJJ and C-IW. ER and MAH conducted the statistical analysis in this paper. JEO, JRC and KJY contributed critically for manuscript drafting. All the authors had approved the final version of the manuscript.

  • Funding This study was supported by the Mayo Clinic Center for Individualized Medicine.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Ethics approval This study was approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board (IRB), and this secondary analysis was reviewed and approved by the Mayo Clinic Biobank Access Committee.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement No additional data are available.