A. Gorman, M. Odalović, P. McCallion, A. Paul, É. Burke, M. MacLachlan, M. McCarron, M. C. Henman, M. Moran, J. O'Connell, R. Shankar, C. Ryan, M. O'Dwyer
{"title":"Comparing self-report medication data from a longitudinal study on intellectual disability and national dispensing records","authors":"A. Gorman, M. Odalović, P. McCallion, A. Paul, É. Burke, M. MacLachlan, M. McCarron, M. C. Henman, M. Moran, J. O'Connell, R. Shankar, C. Ryan, M. O'Dwyer","doi":"10.1111/jir.13192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Medication data are a valuable resource in epidemiological studies. As the most common data collection method of medication data is self-report, it is important to understand the accuracy of this in comparison with other methods such as dispensing records. The aim of this study was to compare the agreement between two different sources of medication data of older adults with intellectual disability (ID).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Self-report medication data were gathered from the Intellectual Disability Supplement to the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing and linked to national pharmacy dispensing records. The kappa statistic was used to measure agreement between the two data sources for psychotropic medication.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The lowest agreement level was ‘moderate’ for the number of anxiolytics reported (kappa 0.56). The highest level of agreement was ‘almost perfect’ for the binary variable of antipsychotics (kappa 0.91). Other agreement results were ‘substantial’ or ‘almost perfect’.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Good agreement was found between the Intellectual Disability Supplement to the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing medication dataset and national dispensing records. Self-report medication data appear to be a valid method of data collection in psychotropic medication use in adults with ID.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16163,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","volume":"69 1","pages":"103-111"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11621587/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intellectual Disability Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jir.13192","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Medication data are a valuable resource in epidemiological studies. As the most common data collection method of medication data is self-report, it is important to understand the accuracy of this in comparison with other methods such as dispensing records. The aim of this study was to compare the agreement between two different sources of medication data of older adults with intellectual disability (ID).
Methods
Self-report medication data were gathered from the Intellectual Disability Supplement to the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing and linked to national pharmacy dispensing records. The kappa statistic was used to measure agreement between the two data sources for psychotropic medication.
Results
The lowest agreement level was ‘moderate’ for the number of anxiolytics reported (kappa 0.56). The highest level of agreement was ‘almost perfect’ for the binary variable of antipsychotics (kappa 0.91). Other agreement results were ‘substantial’ or ‘almost perfect’.
Conclusions
Good agreement was found between the Intellectual Disability Supplement to the Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing medication dataset and national dispensing records. Self-report medication data appear to be a valid method of data collection in psychotropic medication use in adults with ID.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Intellectual Disability Research is devoted exclusively to the scientific study of intellectual disability and publishes papers reporting original observations in this field. The subject matter is broad and includes, but is not restricted to, findings from biological, educational, genetic, medical, psychiatric, psychological and sociological studies, and ethical, philosophical, and legal contributions that increase knowledge on the treatment and prevention of intellectual disability and of associated impairments and disabilities, and/or inform public policy and practice. Expert reviews on themes in which recent research has produced notable advances will be included. Such reviews will normally be by invitation.