Chronic diseases

GP information

Documentation first General Practitioner data collection (1992-1993)

Documentation second General Practitioner data collection (2000-2001)

Documentation third General Practitioner data collection (2005-2006)

Documentation fourth General Practitioner data collection (2010)


Contact: Laura Schaap

This is the first data collection among general practitioners (GPs) which was set up to compare self-report data of community-dwelling elderly persons on the presence of a number of specific chronic diseases with data collected through general practitioners.

Measurement instruments in LASA
GPs were approached if respondents had joined the mean interview in 1992/1993 (B-cycle) and had given informed consent. In total, 447 GPs were approached, providing information about 2982 respondents.

All 447 GPs of whom the patients had given their written informed consent were approached. The questionnaires were mailed in two waves. For each wave, reminders were sent 2 and 4 months after the questionnaires were mailed. The GPs were offered a financial incentive of Hfl. 7,50 for every completed questionnaire they returned.

A total of 371 GPs (83%) returned completed questionnaires on 2380 respondents (83.8% of those who gave informed consent). The response was 85.7% after correction for patients who were unknown to the GP (n=46), or of whom no records were available after they deceased (n=17). There was no difference between the response percentages of GPs over the three regions (western, eastern, and southern parts of the Netherlands). The average number of returned questionnaires per GP was 6.5, with a range from 1 to 99.

Under Construction

Variable information
Under Construction

Availability of information per wave 1

























1   More information about the LASA data collection waves is available here.

*  2B=baseline second cohort;
   3B=baseline third cohort (measurement by spirometry, Under Construction);
   MB=migrants: baseline first cohort

Previous use in LASA
Kriegsman et al. (1996) state that patients’ self-reports on selected chronic diseases are fairly accurate, with the exceptions of atherosclerosis and arthritis. Overreporting and underreporting of specific diseases was associated with several personal characteristics. The results suggested that the tendency to overreport or underreport may be explained by denial by the patient, the tendency of patients to label symptoms or inaccuracy of GP records.

Galenkamp et al. (2014) compared self-reports with GP reported diseases in 2009 and examined how the prevalence of over-reporting and under-reporting had changed since 1992. Results showed that over-reporting of chronic diseases became significantly more common over time, whereas under-reporting became less common.


  1. Galenkamp H, Huisman M, Braam AW, Schellevis FG, Deeg DJH. Disease prevalence based on older people's self-reports increased, but patient-general practitioner agreement remained stable, 1992-2009.  Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67 (7): 773-780.
  2. Kriegsman, DM, Penninx BW, van Eijk JT, Boeke AJ, Deeg DJ. Self-reports and general practitioner information on the presence of chronic diseases in community-dwelling elderly. A study on the accuracy of patients' self-reports and on determinants of inaccuracy. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996 Dec; 49 (12):1407-17.