Evidence Hub

Rounding behavior in the reporting of headache frequency complicates headache chronification research

Houle TT, Turner DP, Houle TA, Smitherman TA, Martin V, Penzien DB, Lipton RB

Headache, 2013

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To characterize the extent of measurement error arising from rounding in headache frequency reporting (days per month) in a population sample of headache sufferers.

BACKGROUND: When reporting numerical health information, individuals tend to round their estimates. The tendency to round to the nearest 5 days when reporting headache frequency can distort distributions and engender unreliability in frequency estimates in both clinical and research contexts.

METHODS: This secondary analysis of the 2005 American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study survey characterized the population distribution of 30-day headache frequency among community headache sufferers and determined the extent of numerical rounding ("heaping") in self-reported data. Headache frequency distributions (days per month) were examined using a simplified version of Wang and Heitjan's approach to heaping to estimate the probability that headache sufferers round to a multiple of 5 when providing frequency reports. Multiple imputation was used to estimate a theoretical "true" headache frequency.

RESULTS: Of the 24,000 surveys, headache frequency data were available for 15,976 respondents diagnosed with migraine (68.6%), probable migraine (8.3%), or episodic tension-type headache (10.0%); the remainder had other headache types. The mean number of headaches days/month was 3.7 (standard deviation = 5.6). Examination of the distribution of headache frequency reports revealed a disproportionate number of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free