Patient clock drawing and accuracy of self-report compared with chart review for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening

Arch Gerontol Geriatr. May-Jun 2010;50(3):341-4. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2009.05.017. Epub 2009 Jul 1.


The purpose of this study was to test the accuracy of patient colorectal cancer (CRC) screening self-report and CRC screening documented in their medical record for those who are cognitively impaired and those who are not based on the clock drawing task. A cross-sectional study where patient survey and medical record information were linked was conducted in 16 primary care offices. Of the 960 patients mailed questionnaires, there were 493 respondents who completed the questionnaire and clock drawing, had a chart review, and had no help in drawing the clock or completing the questionnaire. Chart review was conducted for CRC screening in physician offices. Clock drawings were scored 0-7 according to the Watson method. Accuracy of ever being screened for CRC or being up-to-date for CRC screening was determined by comparing self-report with medical records and calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, false positive rate, and false negative rate. Seventy-five clocks were abnormal, scoring 4 or more. Agreement between self-reported colonoscopy and medical record review was higher in subjects with normal clock drawings than those with abnormal clock drawings. When examining predictors of agreement/disagreement for colonoscopy screening, abnormal clock drawing was the single predictor for higher disagreement.

Publication types

  • Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Case-Control Studies
  • Cognition Disorders*
  • Colonoscopy*
  • Colorectal Neoplasms / prevention & control*
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Iowa
  • Male
  • Mass Screening*
  • Medical History Taking*
  • Neuropsychological Tests
  • Primary Health Care
  • Sensitivity and Specificity