Online vs Face-To-Face Administration of Impulse Control Disorder Questionnaires in Parkinson Disease: Does Method Matter?

Bonnie M. Scott, Robert S. Eisinger, Revath Sankar, Jared F. Benge, Robin C. Hilsabeck, Michael S. Okun, Aysegul Gunduz, Dawn Bowers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background and ObjectiveSocial desirability bias, the tendency to underreport undesirable behaviors, may be one reason patients with Parkinson disease (PD) underreport symptoms of impulse control disorders (ICDs).MethodsWe compared rates of ICD endorsement on questionnaires administered face-To-face and online in 60 patients with mild-To-moderate idiopathic PD. Participants also completed a self-report measure of social desirability.ResultsWe found a significantly higher prevalence of any ICD based on online (56.7%) vs in-person (33.3%) administration. Significantly higher endorsement of items related to hypersexuality in men and compulsive eating and buying in women were found with online administration. Social desirability bias was positively correlated with ICD symptom endorsement across all items and subscales.DiscussionThe results highlight the importance of social context/setting and the need for sensitivity and discretion when screening for ICD symptoms. Although a higher level of symptom endorsement does not necessarily imply a greater level of accuracy, more work is needed to determine which method of administration is most accurate for clinical and research practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)E93-E97
JournalNeurology: Clinical Practice
Volume12
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2022
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Online vs Face-To-Face Administration of Impulse Control Disorder Questionnaires in Parkinson Disease: Does Method Matter?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this