Lifetime body size and reproductive factors: comparisons of data recorded prospectively with self reports in middle age.
BACKGROUND
Data on lifetime exposures are often self-reported in epidemiologic studies, sometimes many years after the relevant age. Validity of self-reported data is usually inferred from their agreement with measured values, but few studies directly quantify the likely effects of reporting errors in body size and reproductive history variables on estimates of disease-exposure associations.


METHODS
The MRC National Survey of Health and Development (NSHD) and the Million Women Study (MWS) are UK population-based prospective cohorts. The NSHD recruited participants at birth in 1946 and has followed them at regular intervals since then, whereas the MWS recruited women in middle age. For 541 women who were participants in both studies, we used statistical measures of association and agreement to compare self-reported MWS data on body size throughout life and reproductive history, obtained in middle age, to NSHD data measured or reported close to the relevant ages. Likely attenuation of estimates of linear disease-exposure associations due to the combined effects of random and systematic errors was quantified using regression dilution ratios (RDRs).


RESULTS
Data from the two studies were very strongly correlated for current height, weight and body mass index, and age at menopause (Pearson r = 0.91-0.95), strongly correlated for birth weight, parental heights, current waist and hip circumferences and waist-to-height ratio (r = 0.67-0.80), and moderately correlated for age at menarche and waist-to-hip ratio (r = 0.52-0.57). Self-reported categorical body size and clothes size data for various ages were moderately to strongly associated with anthropometry collected at the relevant times (Spearman correlations 0.51-0.79). Overall agreement between the studies was also good for most quantitative variables, although all exhibited both random and systematic reporting error. RDRs ranged from 0.66 to 0.86 for most variables (slight to moderate attenuation), except weight and body mass index (1.02 and 1.04, respectively; little or no attenuation), and age at menarche, birth weight and waist-to-hip ratio (0.44, 0.59 and 0.50, respectively; substantial attenuation).


CONCLUSIONS
This study provides some evidence that self-reported data on certain anthropometric and reproductive factors may be adequate for describing disease-exposure associations in large epidemiological studies, provided that the effects of reporting errors are quantified and the results are interpreted with caution.
Cancer Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. ben.cairns@ceu.ox.ac.uk
Benjamin J
BJ
Cairns
Bette
B
Liu
Suzanne
S
Clennell
Rachel
R
Cooper
Gillian K
GK
Reeves
Valerie
V
Beral
Diana
D
Kuh
D015992:Body Mass Index; D049628:Body Size / Q000502:physiology; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D004812:Epidemiologic Methods; D005260:Female; D006306:Health Surveys; D006801:Humans; D008593:Menopause; D008875:Middle Aged; D011446:Prospective Studies; D018456:Reproductive Medicine / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D057566:Self Report; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D006113:United Kingdom
Am J Epidemiol. 1990 Dec;132(6):1156-63
2260547
Public Health Nutr. 2002 Aug;5(4):561-5
12186665
Eur J Epidemiol. 2001;17(10):907-9
12188008
Obes Rev. 2007 Jul;8(4):307-26
17578381
Am J Epidemiol. 1993 Jul 1;138(1):56-64
8333427
Int J Epidemiol. 1996 Feb;25(1):122-7
8666479
Breast Cancer Res. 1999;1(1):73-80
11056681
Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Aug 15;150(4):341-53
10453810
Br J Prev Soc Med. 1974 Nov;28(4):273-5
4455348
Stat Med. 1989 Sep;8(9):1051-69; discussion 1071-3
2799131
Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Jan 15;147(2):136-40
9457002
Stat Med. 1993 May 30;12(10):925-35
8337549
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
2868172
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2006 Nov;14(11):2071-9
17135625
Am J Epidemiol. 2002 Apr 1;155(7):672-9
11914195
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1998 Sep;22(9):827-35
9756239
Am J Epidemiol. 1994 Feb 15;139(4):415-21
8109576
Stat Med. 1993 May 30;12(10):937-48
8337550
BMC Public Health. 2009 Nov 19;9:421
19922675
Int J Epidemiol. 1998 Dec;27(6):1033-7
10024199
Matern Child Health J. 2009 Jul;13(4):489-96
18607705
Am J Clin Nutr. 1991 Jun;53(6):1493-8
2035478
Lancet. 1990 Mar 31;335(8692):765-74
1969518
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2003 Sep-Oct;48(5):338-45
14526347
Psychol Bull. 1979 Mar;86(2):420-8
18839484
Nutr J. 2005 Oct 06;4:27
16209706
Br J Nutr. 1998 Jul;80(1):81-8
9797647
Am J Epidemiol. 1997 Jan 15;145(2):184-96
9006315
Epidemiology. 2004 Sep;15(5):550-6
15308954
Contraception. 1997 Dec;56(6):373-8
9494771
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006 Nov;60(11):993-7
17053289
Br J Prev Soc Med. 1961 Oct;15:143-53
13905738
Am J Clin Nutr. 1990 Dec;52(6):1125-33
2239790
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 Dec 3;100(23):1658-9
19033567
Public Health Nutr. 2004 Sep;7(6):723-7
15369609
Ann Epidemiol. 1998 Jan;8(1):56-63
9465995
Am J Epidemiol. 1995 Sep 1;142(5):548-56
7677134
Am J Epidemiol. 2001 Feb 15;153(4):394-403
11207158
Am J Epidemiol. 2000 Oct 1;152(7):609-16
11032155
Lancet. 1956 Sep 15;271(6942):569-70
13368467
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2000 Aug;54(8):639
10890878
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
843571
Int J Epidemiol. 2006 Feb;35(1):49-54
16204333
Lancet. 2009 Mar 28;373(9669):1083-96
19299006
J Hum Nutr Diet. 2005 Dec;18(6):423-30
16351701