Comparison of questionnaire and diary methods in acute childhood respiratory illness surveillance.

Abstract

We compared two prospective survey methods, an interviewer-administered questionnaire and a daily diary, used concurrently to record acute respiratory illness experience over a 2-yr period in 422 children 5 to 11 yr of age from East Boston, Massachusetts. Respondents contributed more months of data with the questionnaire than with the diary method. Respiratory symptom and illness rates, as determined for the first year by each of the methods, were compared for 277 children who had less than 4 months of missing data. Respondents from families with more children tended to report a lower total respiratory illness rate by the diary than by the questionnaire method (p = 0.006). Although upper respiratory illness rates did not differ by method, lower respiratory illnesses were reported more frequently (p = 0.0001) by questionnaire than by diary. In the group of 49 children who were identified as having had greater than one lower respiratory illness, 25% of the illnesses reported as having been lower respiratory by questionnaire were reported as having been another form of respiratory illness by diary. For this group the ratio of 3:1 of boys to girls for the diary as compared with 1.5:1 for the questionnaire suggests the presence of reporting bias and no comparability of methods. Standardization of an acute respiratory illness questionnaire would provide greater opportunity than use of diaries for synthesis of prospective data from different epidemiologic studies.