Table 3.

Summary of studies on recall period

Author (date); Country; Study Design; Measurement properties evaluated	Objective	Sample size (N); Setting; Age; Population	Main findings	QualSyst Score (%)
Chogle (2012) [61]; USA; Quantitative; Prospective; Acceptability, feasibility	To assess ability to accurately recall abdominal pain in children—comparison of daily reports vs one-month recall	N = 63; Outpatients; 8–17 years; Functional gastro-intestinal disorders	Most children reported a lower frequency of abdominal pain by recall than daily diaries (r = 0.4; CI 0.17–0.59%). Children 8–11 years had a higher correlation (r = 0.59) than those 12–18 (r = 0.26). Similar correlations were found to just the past 7 days (r = 0.47)	68
Heyer (2014) [62]; USA; Quantitative; Prospective; Feasibility, reliability	To compare the 90 day and 30-day recall of paediatric migraine disability assessment (PedMIDAS) elements and headache frequency against daily entries from an internet headache diary	N = 52; Outpatients; 10–18 years; Migraine	Reliability improved at 30-day recall compared to 90 days. 90-day diary: PedMIDAD r = 0.65; headaches r = 0.8330-day diary: PedMIDAD r = 086; headaches r = 0.88. Age and confidence in ability to answer were poor predictors of recall accuracy	86
Irwin (2009) [95]; USA; Qualitative; Cross-sectional; Feasibility	To conduct cognitive interviews with children and adolescents to gain feedback on items measuring physical functioning, emotional health, social health, fatigue, pain and asthma specific symptoms for PROMIS item bank	N = 100; Hospital; 4–7 years; Oncology	All children reported that the 7-day recall period meant the past 7 days and responded to items accordingly	60
Jacobson (2015) [67]; USA; Qualitative; Cognitive interviews; Cross-sectional; Feasibility	To develop and evaluate item candidates for new PROMIS Pediatric Pain Quality and Pain Behavior item banks, and Pain Intensity items	N = 34; Hospital; 8–18 years; Chronic pain	Participants from 8–18 years old understood that the recall period referred to the past week. There was a need to reiterate the 7-day time period to some younger children	70
Okupa (2013) [63]; USA; Quantitative; Prospective; Feasibility, reliability	To compare daily diaries vs retrospective questionnaires to assess asthma control	N = 88; Asthma Research and Education Network Centres; 6–17 years; Asthma	Asthma control days correlated better with daily diary information from the last 2 weeks of a 4-week recall (r = 0.46) than from the first 2 weeks	68
Ravens-Sieberer (2014) [66]; USA; Qualitative; Cognitive interviews; Acceptability and feasibility	To (1) conceptualize children’s subjective well-being and (2) produce item pools with excellent content validity for calibration and use in computerized adaptive testing	N = 37; Not stated; 8–17 years; Healthy and chronic conditions	Cognitive interviews supported children’s capacity to use a 7-day recall period for positive affect and a 4 week recall period for life satisfaction	65
Rebok (2001) [92]; USA; Qualitative—cognitive interviews; Cross-sectional; Acceptability, feasibility	1) to determine whether children can answer health survey items. 2) to test the feasibility of a pictorial questionnaire format using cartoon drawings of a child. 3) to examine several types and numbers of response formats to see which are preferred and most easily understood. 4) to test children’s understanding of specific concepts of health and wording of different response formats	N = 114; School/kindergarten; 5–11 years; Healthy	80% of participants could accurately use a 4 week recall period. Younger children did not understand the concept of a week and may not have used the 4-week time interval appropriately	70
Self (2015) [64]; USA; Quantitative; Prospective; Feasibility, reliability	To evaluate correspondence between retrospective questionnaire and prospective diary data for children and adolescents with IBS	N = 50; Outpatients; 8–18 years; Irritable bowel	For pain days ICC = 0.83 and days without bowel movement ICC = 0.74. Maximum pain score ICC = 0.8 and days with diarrhoea = -0.03. Although under conditions likely to facilitate agreement and with individual variation observed. Age was not significantly related to difference scores	70
Tomlinson (2019) [93]; Canada; Qualitative—cognitive interviews; Cross-sectional; Feasibility	To develop a new self-report symptom screening tool for children receiving cancer treatments who are 4–7 years of age (mini-SSPedi), based on SSPedi	N = 100; Hospital; 4–7 years; Oncology	Only 40% understood the time frame yesterday, so today was chosen for the measure	60
van den Brink(2001) [65]; Netherlands; Quantitative; Prospective; Feasibility, reliability	To investigate whether children and adolescents can recall prior headache complaints accurately and to study whether age, gender, headache severity, preferred coping strategies, depression, somatization, and trait anxiety are related to recall errors, causing recall bias	N = 100; School; 9–16 years; Headache	Compared to daily diary, retrospective questions led to overestimation of headache intensity and duration (r = 0.16). Lower age and increased headache severity were statistically related to recall errors	50
Vreeman (2014) [94]; Kenya; Qualitative; Cross-sectional; Acceptability, feasibility	To improve the understandability of paediatric antiretroviral adherence measurement items through cognitive interviewing with paediatric caregivers and HIV-infected adolescents	N = 10; HIV clinics; 13–18 years; HIV	Adolescents preferred either a 24-h recall period for ease of remembering or a 1 month recall as clinic appointments were monthly	70