title: The validity of self-reported cancer screening history and the role of social disadvantage in Ontario, Canada.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Self-report may not be an accurate method of determining cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening rates due to recall, acquiescence and social desirability biases, particularly for certain sociodemographic groups. Therefore, the aims of this study were to determine the validity of self-report of cancer screening in Ontario, Canada, both for people in the general population and for socially disadvantaged groups based on immigrant status, ethnicity, education, income, language ability, self-rated health, employment status, age category (for cervical cancer screening), and gender (for fecal occult blood testing).
  
  
  METHODS
  We linked multiple data sources for this study, including the Canadian Community Health Survey and provincial-level health databases. Using administrative data as our gold standard, we calculated validity measures for self-report (i.e. sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, positive and negative predictive values), calculated report-to-record ratios, and conducted a multivariable regression analysis to determine which characteristics were independently associated with over-reporting of screening.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Specificity was less than 70% overall and for all subgroups for cervical and breast cancer screening, and sensitivity was lower than 80% overall and for all subgroups for fecal occult blood testing FOBT. Report-to-record ratios were persistently significantly greater than 1 across all cancer screening types, highest for the FOBT group: 1.246 [1.189-1.306]. Regression analyses showed no consistent patterns, but sociodemographic characteristics were associated with over-reporting for each screening type.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  We have found that in Ontario, as in other jurisdictions, there is a pervasive tendency for people to over-report their cancer screening histories. Sociodemographic status also appears to influence over-reporting. Public health practitioners and policymakers need to be aware of the limitations of self-report and adjust their methods and interpretations accordingly.
authors: St. Michael's Hospital Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Aisha.lofters@utoronto.ca.|Centre for Research on Inner City Health, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada. Aisha.lofters@utoronto.ca.|Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Canada. Aisha.lofters@utoronto.ca.
authors: Aisha
authors: A
authors: Lofters
authors: Centre for Research on Inner City Health, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada. mvahabi@ryerson.ca.|Faculty of Community Services, Daphne Cockwell School of Nursing, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada. mvahabi@ryerson.ca.
authors: Mandana
authors: M
authors: Vahabi
authors: St. Michael's Hospital Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Rick.glazier@ices.on.ca.|Centre for Research on Inner City Health, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada. Rick.glazier@ices.on.ca.|Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Canada. Rick.glazier@ices.on.ca.
authors: Richard H
authors: RH
authors: Glazier
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D015179:Colorectal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000453:epidemiology; D055088:Early Detection of Cancer / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D009864:Ontario / Q000453:epidemiology; D010358:Patient Participation / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D012650:Self Disclosure; D057566:Self Report; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D002583:Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000453:epidemiology
references: J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(4-5):403-8
references: 2010783
references: Fam Cancer. 2012 Mar;11(1):27-32
references: 22080962
references: Health Rep. 2009 Sep;20(3):21-30
references: 19813436
references: Prev Med. 2002 Nov;35(5):463-73
references: 12431895
references: Can Fam Physician. 2007 Jul;53(7):1192-7
references: 17872816
references: Public Health Nurs. 2013 Jul;30(4):312-22
references: 23808856
references: Prev Med. 2010 Dec;51(6):509-16
references: 20932995
references: Prev Med. 2009 Feb;48(2):99-107
references: 19118570
references: BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:122
references: 17010195
references: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2000 Feb;9(2):229-32
references: 10698488
references: Ethn Dis. 2006 Autumn;16(4):994-1000
references: 17061758
references: Can Fam Physician. 2009 Feb;55(2):178-179.e5
references: 19221082
references: BMC Womens Health. 2004 Aug 25;4 Suppl 1:S13
references: 15345076
references: CMAJ. 2011 Nov 22;183(17):1991-2001
references: 22106103
references: J Intellect Disabil Res. 2013 May;57(5):478-88
references: 23506206
references: Can J Public Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;96(2):140-4
references: 15850036
references: Am J Prev Med. 1998 Apr;14(3):201-8
references: 9569221
references: Cancer Epidemiol. 2013 Dec;37(6):946-56
references: 23702337
references: CMAJ. 2004 Nov 23;171(11):1369-73
references: 15557592
references: Prev Med. 2010 Apr;50(4):159-64
references: 20093138
references: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2008 Apr;17(4):748-57
references: 18381468
references: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012 Jan;21(1):61-5
references: 22144501
references: Prev Med. 2004 Nov;39(5):943-50
references: 15475028
references: Can J Public Health. 2001 Mar-Apr;92(2):127-33
references: 11338151
references: J Community Health. 2002 Oct;27(5):351-6
references: 12238733
references: CMAJ. 2001 Apr 3;164(7):1017-25
references: 11314432
references: ISRN Oncol. 2013 Aug 01;2013:810573
references: 23984098
references: Am J Epidemiol. 1997 Dec 1;146(11):982-92
references: 9400341