Reporting biases in self-assessed physical and cognitive health status of older Europeans

Autoři: Sonja Spitzer aff001;  Daniela Weber aff001
Působiště autorů: World Population Program at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Wittgenstein Centre for Demography and Global Human Capital, Laxenburg, Austria aff001;  Health Economics and Policy Division of the Vienna University of Economics and Business, Vienna, Austria aff002
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223526


This paper explores which demographic characteristics substantially bias self-reported physical and cognitive health status of older Europeans. The analysis utilises micro-data for 19 European countries from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe to compare performance-tested outcomes of mobility and memory with their self-reported equivalents. Relative importance analysis based on multinomial logistic regressions shows that the bias in self-reported health is mostly due to reporting heterogeneities between countries and age groups, whereas gender contributes little to the discrepancy. Concordance of mobility and cognition measures is highly related; however, differences in reporting behaviour due to education and cultural background have a larger impact on self-assessed memory than on self-assessed mobility. Southern as well as Central and Eastern Europeans are much more likely to misreport their physical and cognitive abilities than Northern and Western Europeans. Overall, our results suggest that comparisons of self-reported health between countries and age groups are prone to significant biases, whereas comparisons between genders are credible for most European countries. These findings are crucial given that self-assessed data are often the only information available to researchers and policymakers when asking health-related questions.

Klíčová slova:

Age groups – Behavior – Behavioral and social aspects of health – Cognitive impairment – Employment – Europe – Memory – Memory recall


1. Coman L, Richardson J. Relationship between self-report and performance measures of function: a systematic review. Can J aging. 2006;25(3):253–70. 17001588

2. Fors S, Thorslund M, Parker MG. Do actions speak louder than words? Self-assessed and performance-based measures of physical and visual function among old people. Eur J Ageing. 2006;3(1):15–21. doi: 10.1007/s10433-006-0021-5 28794746

3. Beaudoin M, Desrichard O. Are memory self-efficacy and memory performance related? A meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2011 Mar;137(2):211–41. doi: 10.1037/a0022106 21244133

4. Capistrant BD, Glymour MM, Berkman LF. Assessing mobility difficulties for cross-national comparisons: Results from the WHO study on AGEing and Adult Health. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014;62(2):329–35. doi: 10.1111/jgs.12633 24438515

5. Jackson JD, Rentz DM, Aghjayan SL, Buckley RF, Meneide TF, Sperling RA, et al. Subjective cognitive concerns are associated with objective memory performance in Caucasian but not African-American persons. Age Ageing. 2017;46(6):988–93. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afx077 29088363

6. Grant LH, Ward MM. Association of measured physical performance and demographic and health characteristics with self-reported physical function: implications for the interpretation of self-reported limitations. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8(1):84.

7. Crossley TF, Kennedy S. The reliability of self-assessed health status. J Health Econ. 2001;21:643–58.

8. Huang Z, Maurer J. Validity of self-rated memory among middle-aged and older chinese adults: Results from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS). Assessment. 2017;1–12.

9. Merrill SS, Seeman TE, Kasl S V., Berkman LF. Gender differences in the comparison of self-reported disability and performance measures. Journals Gerontol—Ser A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1997;52(1):19–26.

10. Sakurai R, Fujiwara Y, Ishihara M, Higuchi T, Uchida H, Imanaka K. Age-related self-overestimation of step-over ability in healthy older adults and its relationship to fall risk. BMC Geriatr. 2013;13(44):1–9.

11. Hardy MA, Acciai F, Reyes AM. How health conditions translate into self-ratings: A comparative study of older adults across Europe. J Health Soc Behav. 2014;55(3):320–41. doi: 10.1177/0022146514541446 25138200

12. Verropoulou G. Determinants of change in self-rated health among older adults in Europe: A longitudinal perspective based on SHARE data. Eur J Ageing. 2012;9(4):305–18. doi: 10.1007/s10433-012-0238-4 28804430

13. Schneider U, Pfarr C, Schneider BS, Ulrich V. I feel good! Gender differences and reporting heterogeneity in self-assessed health. Eur J Heal Econ. 2012;13(3):251–65.

14. Jürges H. True health vs response style: exploring cross-country differences in self-reported health. Health Econ. 2007;16:163–78. doi: 10.1002/hec.1134 16941555

15. Oksuzyan A, Dańko MJ, Caputo J, Jasilionis D, Shkolnikov VM. Is the story about sensitive women and stoical men true? Gender differences in health after adjustment for reporting behavior. Soc Sci Med. 2019;228(March):41–50.

16. Bago d’Uva T, Van Doorslaer E, Lindeboom M, O’Donnell O. Does reporting heterogeneity bias the measurement of health diesparities? Health Econ. 2008;17:351–75. doi: 10.1002/hec.1269 17701960

17. Peracchi F, Rossetti C. Heterogeneity in health responses and anchoring vignettes. Empir Econ. 2012;42(2):513–38.

18. Voňková H, Hullegie P. Is the anchoring vignette method sensitive to the domain and choice of the vignette? J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2011;174(3):597–620.

19. Furnham A. Self-estimates of intelligence : culture and gender difference in self and other estimates of both general (g) and multiple intelligences. Pers Individ Dif. 2001;31:1381–405.

20. Mabe PA, West SG. Validity of self-evaluation of ability: A review and meta-analysis. J Appl Psychol. 1982;67(3):280–96.

21. Börsch-Supan A, Brandt M, Litwin H, Weber G, editors. Active ageing and solidarity between generations in Europe: First results from SHARE after the economic crisis. Berlin: De Gruyter; 2013.

22. Malter F, Börsch-Supan A, editors. SHARE Wave 4: Innovations and Methodology. Munich: Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy; 2013.

23. Börsch-Supan A, Brandt M, Hunkler C, Kneip T, Korbmacher J, Malter F, et al. Data resource profile: The Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE). Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(4):992–1001. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyt088 23778574

24. Malter F, Börsch-Supan A. SHARE Wave 5: Innovations & Methodology. Munich: MEA, Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy; 2015.

25. Börsch-Supan A, Brugiavini A, Jürges H, Kapteyn A, Mackenbach J, Siegrist J, et al. First results from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (2004–2007). Starting the longitudinal dimension. Mannheim: Mannheim Research Institute for the Economics of Aging (MEA); 2008.

26. Ethics Council of the Max Planck Society. Opinion of the Ethics Council of the Max Planck Society on the “SHARE” project [Internet]. 2018.

27. Börsch-Supan A. Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) Wave 2. Release version: 6.1.1. SHARE-ERIC. Data set. [Internet]. 2018.

28. Börsch-Supan A. Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) Wave 5. Release version: 6.1.1. SHARE-ERIC. Data set. 2018

29. Börsch-Supan A. Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) Wave 4. Release version: 6.1.1. SHARE-ERIC. Data set. [Internet]. 2018.

30. Gardner RC, Langa KM, Yaffe K. Subjective and objective cognitive function among older adults with a history of traumatic brain injury: A population-based cohort study. PLoS Med. 2017;14(3):1–16.

31. Grodstein F, Chen J, Wilson RS, Manson JE. Type 2 diabetes and cognitive function in community-dwelling elderly women. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(6):1060–5. doi: 10.2337/diacare.24.6.1060 11375371

32. Purser JL, Fillenbaum GG, Pieper CF, Wallace RB. Mild cognitive impairment and 10-year trajectories of disability in the Iowa established populations for epidemiologic studies of the elderly cohort. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(11):1966–72. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53566.x 16274380

33. Bago d’Uva T, O’Donnell O, Van Doorslaer E. Differential health reporting by education level and its impact on the measurement of health inequalities among older Europeans. Int J Epidemiol. 2008;37(6):1375–83. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyn146 18676985

34. Srisurapanont M, Suttajit S, Eurviriyanukul K, Varnado P. Discrepancy between objective and subjective cognition in adults with major depressive disorder. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1–7.

35. Idler EL. Age differences in self-assessments of health: Age changes, cohort differences, or survivorship? J Gerontol. 1993;48(6):289–300.

36. Henchoz K, Cavalli S, Girardin M. Health perception and health status in advanced old age: A paradox of association. J Aging Stud. 2008;22(3):282–90.

37. Verbrugge LM, Wingard DL. Sex differentials in health and mortality. Women Health. 1987 Nov 4;12(2):103–45. doi: 10.1300/J013v12n02_07 3424846

38. Luy M, Minagawa Y. Gender gaps—life expectancy and proportion of life in poor health. Heal Reports. 2014;25(12):12–9.

39. Caroli E, Weber-Baghdiguian L. Self-reported health and gender: The role of social norms. Soc Sci Med. 2016 Mar 1;153:220–9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.02.023 26921837

40. Eurostat. International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2018 Jul 20]. _Classification_of_Education_%28ISCED%29#Correspondence_between_ISCED_2011 _and_ISCED_1997

41. Angel S, Disslbacher F, Humer S, Schnetzer M. What did you really earn last year?: explaining measurement error in survey income data. J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2019;

42. Luchman JN. DOMIN: Stata module to conduct dominance analysis [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2018 Dec 17].

43. Luchman JN. Relative importance analysis with multicategory dependent variables: An extension and review of best practices. Organ Res Methods. 2014;17(4):452–71.

44. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Gottdiener J, et al. Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001;56A(3):M146–56.

45. Santos-Eggimann B, Cuénoud P, Spagnoli J, Junod J. Prevalence of frailty in middle-aged and older community-dwelling Europeans living in 10 countries. Journals Gerontol—Ser A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2009;64A(6):675–81.

46. Pfarr C, Schmid A, Schneider U. Reporting heterogeneity in self-assessed health among elderly Europeans: The impact of mental and physical health status. Health Econ Rev. 2012;2(21):1–14.

47. Meijer E, Kapteyn A, Andreyeva T. Internationally comparable health indices. Health Econ. 2011 May 1;20(5):600–19. doi: 10.1002/hec.1620 20572201

48. Weber D, Skirbekk V, Freund I, Herlitz A. The changing face of cognitive gender differences in Europe. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2014;111(32):11673–8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1319538111 25071201

49. Frieswijk N, Buunk BP, Steverink N, Slaets JPJ. The effect of social comparison information on the life satisfaction of frail older persons. Psychol Aging. 2004;19(1):183–90. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.19.1.183 15065941

50. Brandtstädter J, Greve W. The aging self: Stabilizing and protecitve processes. Dev Rev. 1994;(14):52–80.

51. Layes A, Asada Y, Kepart G. Whiners and deniers—What does self-rated health measure? Soc Sci Med. 2012;75(1):1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.10.030 22265085

52. Delpierre C, Lauwers-Cances V, Datta GD, Lang T, Berkman L. Using self-rated health for analysing social inequalities in health: A risk for underestimating the gap between socioeconomic groups? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2009;63(6):426–32. doi: 10.1136/jech.2008.080085 19218251

53. Guralnik JM, Branch LG, Cummings SR, Curb JD. Physical performance measures in aging research. J Gerontol. 1989 Sep;44(5):M141–6. doi: 10.1093/geronj/44.5.m141 2768767

54. Kempen GIJM, Steverink N, Ormel J, Deeg DJH. The assessment of ADL among frail elderly in an interview survey: Self- report versus performance-based tests and determinants of discrepancies. Journals Gerontol—Ser B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 1996;51(5):254–60.

55. Berkman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE, Halpern DJ, Crotty K. Low health literacy and health outcomes: An updated systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(2).

56. Jansen T, Rademakers J, Waverijn G, Verheij R, Osborne R, Heijmans M. The role of health literacy in explaining the association between educational attainment and the use of out-of-hours primary care services in chronically ill people: a survey study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(394):1–13.

57. Siahpush M, McNeill A, Hammond D, Fong GT. Socioeconomic and country variations in knowledge of health risks of tobacco smoking and toxic constituents of smoke: Results from the 2002 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Tob Control. 2006;15(3):65–70.

58. Muttarak R. Normalization of Plus Size and the Danger of Unseen Overweight and Obesity in England. Obesity. 2018;26(7):1125–9. doi: 10.1002/oby.22204 29932517

59. Von Wagner C, Steptoe A, Wolf MS, Wardle J. Health literacy and health actions: A review and a framework from health psychology. Heal Educ Behav. 2009;36(5):860–77.

60. Smith SG, Curtis LM, Wardle J, von Wagner C, Wolf MS. Skill Set or Mind Set? Associations between Health Literacy, Patient Activation and Health. PLoS One. 2013;8(9):1–7.

61. Von Wagner C, Knight K, Steptoe A, Wardle J. Functional health literacy and health-promoting behaviour in a national sample of British adults. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007;61(12):1086–90. doi: 10.1136/jech.2006.053967 18000132

62. Loichinger E. Labor force projections up to 2053 for 26 EU countries, by age, sex, and highest level of educational attainment. Demogr Res. 2015;32(15).

63. Oksuzyan A, Juel K, Vaupel JW, Christensen K. Men: good health and high mortality. Sex differences in health and aging. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2008 Apr 25;20(2):91–102. 18431075

64. Benyamini Y, Leventhal EA, Leventhal H. Gender differences in processing information for making self-assessments of health. Psychosom Med. 2000;62:354–64. doi: 10.1097/00006842-200005000-00009 10845349

65. Courtenay WH. Constructions of masculinty and their influence on men’s well being: a theory of gender and health. Soc Sci Med. 2000;50:1385–401. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00390-1 10741575

66. Dave GJ, Bibeau DL, Schulz MR, Aronson RE, Ivanov LL, Black A, et al. Predictors of congruency between self-reported hypertension status and measured blood pressure in the stroke belt. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2013;7(5):370–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jash.2013.04.007 23706250

67. Dey AK, Alyass A, Muir RT, Black SE, Swartz RH, Murray BJ, et al. Validity of self-report of cardiovascular risk factors in a population at high risk for stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;24(12):2860–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2015.08.022 26411693

68. Short ME, Goetzel RZ, Pei X, Tabrizi MJ, Ozminkowski RJ, Gibson TB, et al. How accurate are self-reports? Analysis of self-reported health care utilization and absence when compared with administrative data. J Occup Environ Med. 2009;51(7):786–96. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0b013e3181a86671 19528832

69. Tucker-Drob EM. Neurocognitive functions and everyday functions change together in old age. Neuropsychology. 2011 May;25(3):368–77. doi: 10.1037/a0022348 21417532

70. Dunning D. The Dunning–Kruger Effect: On being ignorant of one’s own ignorance. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. 2011 Jan 1;44:247–96.

71. Dunning D, Heath C, Suls JM. Flawed self-assessment: implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychol Sci Public Interes. 2004 Dec 24;5(3):69–106.

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 10