Abstract

BackgroundThe 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.MethodsAt 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.ResultsIn 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%).ConclusionsAlthough 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.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call