Reporting accuracy among mothers of malformed and nonmalformed infants

Abstract

The potential for recall bias in case-control studies is a common concern. The authors assessed whether recall bias was present in exposure information reported at postpartum interview by mothers of malformed and nonmalformed infants who delivered at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, during 1984. Accuracy of exposure reporting was measured by comparing interview data with exposure information documented during pregnancy in obstetric records. The authors' measure of recall bias, relative sensitivity (RS), is the ratio of exposure-reporting accuracy for mothers of malformed infants to that of mothers of nonmalformed infants. Relative sensitivity estimates that are greater than 1.0 indicate that mothers of malformed infants are more accurate reporters than mothers of nonmalformed infants. Relative sensitivity was estimated for eight exposure factors: antibiotic or antifungal drug use (RS = 1.2), urinary tract or yeast infection (RS = 2.7), history of infertility (RS = 1.4), use of birth control after conception (RS = 7.6), elective abortion history (RS = 1.1), any over-the-counter drug use (RS = 1.0), spotting or bleeding (RS = 1.2), and nausea or vomiting (RS = 0.8) These data suggest the presence of recall bias for some exposure factors. The authors advise the use of malformed controls to reduce potential recall bias in case-control studies of selected malformations and many etiologic factors.