IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v65y2007i6p1078-1081.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disease prevalence and survey design effects: A response to Weir and Smith

Author

Listed:
  • Wilson, Sven
  • Howell, Benjamin L.

Abstract

Evidence provided by Weir and Smith, particularly the findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), leads us to conclude that an increase in arthritis prevalence during the 1990s in the United States is probable, but the trend is likely overstated in the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). We show that a mistake in our earlier method does not change substantively our previous conclusion that survey duration effects are occurring in the HRS, a finding that is also supported by a variety of regression models (including that of Weir and Smith). Furthermore, very little evidence exists for an upward trend among self-reporters in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), and less than 25% of the increase in the HRS over the 1990s can be attributed to increases in obesity.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilson, Sven & Howell, Benjamin L., 2007. "Disease prevalence and survey design effects: A response to Weir and Smith," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(6), pages 1078-1081, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:65:y:2007:i:6:p:1078-1081
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(07)00238-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John Robert Warren & Andrew Halpern-Manners, 2012. "Panel Conditioning in Longitudinal Social Science Surveys," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 41(4), pages 491-534, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:65:y:2007:i:6:p:1078-1081. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.