Pharmaceutisch Weekblad

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 91–96 | Cite as

Comparison of questionnaire information and pharmacy data on drug use

  • Piet A. Van den Brandt
  • Hans Petri
  • Elisabeth Dorant
  • R. Alexandra Goldbohm
  • Sacha Van de Crommert


Information on chronic drug use at any time in the past was collected with a self-administered questionnaire as part of a prospective cohort study on diet, other life-style factors and cancer among subjects aged 55–69 years. The validity of the questionnaire information on drug use was evaluated among 207 subjects by comparing it to pharmacy records of dispensed drugs. The comparison could be made for the 2.5-year period preceding the questionnaire administration. Since the study subjects did not mention prescription drugs that were not dispensed by their pharmacy, indicating no errors of commission, the analyses were focused on the estimation of sensitivity of drug recall and its correlates. Questionnaire recall of drug use amounted overall to 61.2% of drugs prescribed to the subjects for at least 6 months. Drug recall decreased with increasing age and with increasing number of prescribed chronic use of drugs per subject. No difference in recall was observed between men and women. Recall tended to improve with increasing duration of use and varied with type of drug. When only long-term drug use at the time of questionnaire administration was considered, overall recall of drug use was 68.8%.


Drug utilization Epidemiologic methods Neoplasm Pharmacoepidemiology Pharmacy records Questionnaires Validity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Harlow SD, Linet MS. Agreement between questionnaire data and medical records. The evidence for accuracy of recall. Am J Epidemiol 1989;129:223–48.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rosenberg MJ, Layde PM, Ory HW, Strauss LT, Bourne Rooks J, Rubin GL. Agreement between women's histories of oral contraceptive use and physician records. Int J Epidemiol 1983;12:84–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spengler RF, Clarke EA, Woolever CA, Newman AM, Osborn RW. Exogenous estrogens and endometrial cancer: a case-control study and assessment of potential biases. Am J Epidemiol 1981;114:497–506.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tilley BC, Barnes AB, Bergstralh E, et al. A comparison of pregnancy history recall and medical records. Am J Epidemiol 1985;121:269–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paganini-Hill A, Ross RK. Reliability of recall of drug usage and other health related information. Am J Epidemiol 1982;116:114–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adam SA, Sheaves JK, Wright NH, Mosser G, Harris RW, Vessey MP. A case-control study of the possible association between oral conceptives and malignant melanoma. Br J Cancer 1981;44:45–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Linet MS, Harlow SD, McLaughlin JK, McCaffrey LD. A comparison of interview data and medical records for previous medical conditions and surgery. J Clin Epidemiol 1989;42:1207–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Central Bureau of Statistics. Vademecum gezondheidsstatistiek Nederland 1989 [Vademecum Health Statistics of the Netherlands 1989]. The Hague: SDU Publishers, 1989.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van den Brandt PA, Goldbohm RA, Van 't Veer P, Volovics A, Hermus RJJ, Sturmans F. A large-scale prospective cohort study on diet and cancer in The Netherlands. J Clin Epidemiol 1990;43:285–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anonymous. Nordic Statistics on Medicines 1981–1983. Part II. Nordic drug index with classification and defined daily doses. Uppsala: Nordic Council on Medicines, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bond CG, Bodner KM, Sobel W, Shellenberger RJ, Flores GH. Validation of work histories obtained from interviews. Am J Epidemiol 1988;128:343–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mitchell AA, Cottler LB, Shapiro S. Effect of questionnaire design on recall of drug exposure in pregnancy. Am J Epidemiol 1986;123:670–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cramer JA, Mattson RH, Prevey ML, Scheyer RD, Oullette VL. How often is medication taken as prescribed? A novel assessment technique. JAMA 1989;261:3273–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Dutch Association for Advancement of Pharmacy 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Piet A. Van den Brandt
    • 1
  • Hans Petri
    • 1
  • Elisabeth Dorant
    • 1
  • R. Alexandra Goldbohm
    • 2
  • Sacha Van de Crommert
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EpidemiologyUniversity of LimburgMD Maastrichtthe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Human NutritionTNO-CIVO Toxicology and Nutrition InstituteAJ Zeistthe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations