Skip to main content

Table 6 Multinomial Logistic Regression Models: Correlates of Caregiver Overreporting and Underreporting of Patient-Reported Scale Scores (Four models were run–one for each scale score. Each model has a 3-level dependent variable, with concordance being the reference group; the odds ratios (ORs) for over- and under-reporting are relative to the reference group Differences are calculated as (Caregiver-estimated score)‒(Patient-reported score). Concordance was defined as a difference within ± 2 standard errors of measurement (SEM). Overreporting = Difference > 2 SEM higher. Underreporting = Difference > 2 SEM lower. Percentages in column headings are the proportion of caregivers that over- and underreported for each scale.)

From: Agreement between older adult patient and caregiver proxy symptom reports

Patient/caregiver variable†

SymTrak multimorbidity

PEG pain

PHQ-8 depression

GAD-7 anxiety

OR (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

Over (21.3%)

Under (20.2%)

Over (24.2%)

Under (18.7%)

Over (18.7%)

Under (15.0%)

Over (34.2%)

Under (26.2%)

Patient-reported scale score

0.91 (0.85, 0.97)

1.17 (1.10, 1.26)

0.84 (0.72, 0.97)

1.41 (1.18, 1.69)

0.90 (0.79, 1.04)

1.60 (1.33, 1.92)

0.98 (0.84, 1.14)

1.55 (1.32, 1.81)

Caregiver difficulty (Oberst)

1.10 (1.05, 1.16)

0.83 (0.72, 0.95)

1.07 (1.02, 1.12)

0.95 (0.88, 1.03)

1.08 (1.03, 1.13)

0.92 (0.81, 1.05)

1.09 (1.04, 1.15)

0.98 (0.91, 1.07)

Age, ≥ 75 vs < 75

0.76 (0.30, 1.87)

1.42 (0.51, 3.98)

1.07 (0.46, 2.47)

0.97 (0.37, 2.55)

0.67 (0.28, 1.02)

0.85 (0.22, 3.25)

1.43 (0.64, 3.20)

3.54 (1.17, 10.7)

Sex, female vs male

1.86 (0.59, 5.88)

0.91 (0.19, 4.37)

2.32 (0.80, 6.72)

2.99 (0.61, 14.6)

1.72 (0.57, 5.19)

0.95 (0.12, 7.29)

1.29 (0.48, 3.45)

1.99 (0.44, 9.01)

Race, black vs white/other

0.64 (0.25, 1.63)

0.81 (0.28, 2.33)

0.83 (0.35, 1.96)

2.15 (0.78, 5.91)

0.98 (0.40, 2.38)

2.28 (0.52, 9.96)

0.63 (0.28, 1.43)

0.35 (0.11, 1.13)

Income (> 30,000 vs. ≤ 30,000 annually)

0.51 (0.16, 1.56)

0.41 (0.12, 1.47)

0.91 (0.34, 2.38)

1.37 (0.44, 4.32)

1.13 (0.41, 3.10)

7.06 (1.12, 44.6)

0.46 (0.18, 1.20)

0.86 (0.27, 2.76)

Cognitive function (TICS, > 30 vs ≤ 30)

1.46 (0.55, 3.86)

1.13 (0.40, 3.15)

0.52 (0.21, 1.28)

0.48 (0.18, 1.28)

1.61 (0.63, 4.13)

2.68 (0.62, 11.6)

0.61 (0.26, 1.42)

0.79 (0.27, 2.32)

Caregiver sex, female vs male

0.52 (0.18, 1.45)

0.58 (0.13, 2.53)

1.53 (0.55, 4.28)

1.46 (0.37, 5.78)

0.74 (0.27, 2.00)

1.04 (0.18, 6.09)

0.38 (0.14, 1.04)

0.82 (0.20, 3.35)

Caregiver relationship, spouse/partner vs all other

0.79 (0.25, 2.53)

2.30 (0.55, 9.71)

0.86 (0.30, 2.52)

2.75 (0.65, 11.7)

1.85 (0.63, 5.42)

0.64 (0.09, 4.56)

0.55 (0.20, 1.49)

1.20 (0.30, 4.85)

  1. †All models were adjusted for patient age as well as caregiver sex and relationship. Additionally, we entered variables associated with under- or over-reporting on bivariate analysis at a P < .05 for at least one of the 4 scales. Thus, multinomial models for all 4 scales included the 9 variables shown in this table
  2. Bolded ORs are those that are significant at p < .05 (i.e., 95% CI does not include 0)