Diagnostic accuracy of self-reported age-related macular degeneration in the ASPREE Longitudinal Study of Older Persons
Loading...
Date
Authors
McGuinness, Myra B
Robman, Liubov
Hodgson, Lauren
Tran, Cammie
L. Woods, Robyn
Owen, Alice
McNeil, John J
Makeyeva, Galina
Abhayaratna, Walter
Guymer, Robyn
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Nature Publishing Group
Abstract
Background
The validity of findings from epidemiological studies using self-report of ophthalmic conditions depends on several factors. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of self-reported age-related macular degeneration (AMD) among older Australians enroled in a primary prevention clinical trial and compared diagnostic accuracy between demographic subgroups.
Methods
At baseline (2010–2015), Australian sub-study participants of the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) trial, underwent bilateral two-field, 45° non-mydriatic colour retinal photography. Beckman classification of any-stage AMD was used as the reference standard diagnosis. Participants were asked whether a doctor had ever diagnosed them with “macular degeneration” (the index test) via a paper-based questionnaire as part of the ASPREE Longitudinal Study of Older Persons (ALSOP) within the first year of enrolment.
Results
In total, 4193 participants were included (aged 70–92 years, 50.8% female). Of those, 262 (6.3%) reported having AMD and 92 (2.2%) were unsure. Retinal grading detected 2592 (61.8%) with no AMD, 867 (20.7%) with early, 686 (16.4%) with intermediate and 48 (1.1%) with late AMD (n = 1601 with any-stage AMD, 38.2%). Self-reported AMD had 11.4% sensitivity (95% CI 9.9–13.1) and 96.9% specificity (95% CI 96.2–97.6) for any-stage AMD, with 69.8% and 63.9% positive and negative predictive values. Sensitivity was higher among participants with late-stage AMD (87.5%), older participants (26.8%), and those with poorer vision (41.0%).
Conclusions
Although most participants with late-stage AMD were aware of having AMD, the majority with early and intermediate AMD were not. Therefore, findings from studies that rely on disease self-report should be interpreted with caution.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Collections
Source
Eye
Type
Book Title
Entity type
Access Statement
Open Access
License Rights
Creative Commons Attribution licence
Restricted until
Downloads
File
Description