Validity of self-reported mammography uptake in the Belgian health interview survey: selection and reporting bias.

BACKGROUND:The validity of self-reported mammography uptake is often questioned. We assessed the related selection and reporting biases among women aged 50-69 years in the Belgian Health Interview Survey (BHIS) using reimbursement data for mammography stemming from the Belgian Compulsory Health Insurance organizations (BCHI). METHODS:Individual BHIS 2013 data (n = 1040) were linked to BCHI data 2010-13 (BHIS-BCHI sample). Being reimbursed for mammography within the last 2-years was used as the gold standard. Selection bias was assessed by comparing BHIS estimates reimbursement rates in BHIS-BCHI with similar estimates from the Echantillon Permanent/Permanente Steekproef (EPS), a random sample of BCHI data, while reporting bias was investigated by comparing self-reported versus reimbursement information in the BHIS-BCHI. Reporting bias was further explored through measures of agreement and logistic regression. RESULTS:Mammography uptake rates based on self-reported information and reimbursement from the BHIS-BCHI were 75.5% and 69.8%, respectively. In the EPS, it was 64.1%. The validity is significantly affected by both selection bias {relative size = 8.93% [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.21-14.64]} and reporting bias [relative size = 8.22% (95% CI: 0.76-15.68)]. Sensitivity was excellent (93.7%), while the specificity was fair (66.4%). The agreement was moderate (kappa = 0.63). Women born in non-EU countries (OR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.54-5.13), with high household income (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.02-1.60) and those reporting poor perceived health (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.14-1.73) were more likely to inaccurately report their mammography uptake. CONCLUSIONS:The validity of self-reported mammography uptake in women aged 50-69 years is affected by both selection and reporting bias. Both administrative and survey data are complementary when assessing mammography uptake.