1 / 18

Recall of Occupational Injuries: A Comparison of Questionnaire and Diary Data

Analyzing recall errors in self-reported data on work-related injuries through retrospective questionnaires and daily diary reports. Investigating validity, factors influencing recall errors, and the impact of diary reporting on questionnaire accuracy. Conclusions and recommendations for minimizing errors in injury reporting.

dominy
Download Presentation

Recall of Occupational Injuries: A Comparison of Questionnaire and Diary Data

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Recall of Occupational Injuries:A Comparison of Questionnaire and Diary Data Andersen, L. P., M.Sc., Ph.D.* & Mikkelsen, K.L. M.Sc., PhD.** *Department of Occupational Medicine, Herning Hospital. ** National Institute of Occupational Health, Copenhagen

  2. Self-reported retrospective questionnaire data Risk of artificial associations between variables under investigation due to: • Method variance:Item-overlap, confounding variables, social desirability, acquiescence • Measurement errors:Recall errors, recall bias(Spector & Brannick, 1995).

  3. Recall errors Definition: • A non-differential misclassification, where errors are distributed randomly and are assumed to be independent across different observed variables(Rips & Shevell,1987).

  4. Factors related to recall errors Factors related to recall errors: • Response specificity • Similar episodes • Frequency of episodes to remember • Personal relevance of episodes • Time interval to remember (Sudman & Schwartz, 1989)

  5. Examples of recall errors • Cash & Moss (1972): For respondents interviewed 9 - 12 months after a car crash only 72.7% reported the crash compared to 96% interviewed within 3 months after the crash • Harel et al. (1988): A decline in rates from 24.4 per 100 to 14.7 per 100 was found when comparing one month's reference to 12 months reference for injury rates • Landen & Hendrick (1995): The injury rate adjusted for recall errors was 32% higher than the unadjusted rate

  6. Consequences of recall errors • Unreliability about number of injuries • Unreliability about the situations in which injuries occur • Unreliability about work environment factors associated with injuries • Prevention strategies may fail.

  7. Daily diary reports and validity Research has shown diaries produce: • Improvements in accuracy of accounts of specific behaviour compared to questionnaires • Relatively high completion rates even over several months of recording time • Improvements in accuracy of information compared to face-to-face interviews (Berk et al., 1995; Graham et al. 2003).

  8. Present Study The objectives of the present study are: • To examine the effect of daily diary reporting of injuries on subsequent questionnaire reporting of injuries • To evaluate accuracy of recalling work-related injuries in a questionnaire compared with prospective diary injury records

  9. Study design

  10. Questionnaires Work-related injuries: • Cut oneself on a knife • Being hit by an object • Foreign body in the eye • Wrenched or fell • Being trapped • Fell down from the production line • Other injuries • No injury

  11. Analysis strategy • The effect of daily diary registration on recall in the subsequent questionnaire, is analysed by comparing the pre-diary and the post-diary incident rates as reported retrospective by questionnaires, using the incidence rate ratio as the measure of effect. • The validity of the questionnaires compared to diaries is evaluated by comparing incident rates where the two methods of injury reporting cover the same study periods

  12. Questionnaire reported incidence before and after the diary activity 1.62 0.075

  13. Reported incidence in daily diaries and questionnaires 0.041 1.65

  14. The relative reporting in questionnaires compared to diaries • From the results it can be inferred that the relative reporting in a retrospective questionnaire concerning injuries, when recall is not facilitated by previous diary activities, is only • (1/(1.62 x 1.65)) = 37% of the number of injuries reported by daily diary reports.

  15. Conclusion • Daily diary injury reporting facilitated recall in subsequent questionnaire reports of injuries • Only 37% of injuries reported by daily diary are reported in a retrospective injury questionnaire (when recall is not facilitated by previous diary activities)

  16. Limitations • More injuries in the months under investigation? • The validity is evaluated only in employees who completed at least 8 out of 12 possible daily diary reports and subsequently the retrospective questionnaire, covering the same period.

  17. Recommendations • Researchers who want to minimize recall errors should use: • short time periods • questions concerning specific work-related injuries • Supervisors must emphasize the importance of reporting all injuries - this might affect the likelihood that workers actually report every injury

  18. Thank you • Correspondance to Laand@ringamt.dk

More Related