Assessment of demographic and perinatal predictors of non-response and impact of non-response on measures of association in a population-based case control study: findings from the Georgia Study to Explore Early Development.

IF 3.6 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Emerging Themes in Epidemiology Pub Date : 2018-08-16 eCollection Date: 2018-01-01 DOI:10.1186/s12982-018-0081-y
Laura A Schieve, Shericka Harris, Matthew J Maenner, Aimee Alexander, Nicole F Dowling
{"title":"Assessment of demographic and perinatal predictors of non-response and impact of non-response on measures of association in a population-based case control study: findings from the Georgia Study to Explore Early Development.","authors":"Laura A Schieve,&nbsp;Shericka Harris,&nbsp;Matthew J Maenner,&nbsp;Aimee Alexander,&nbsp;Nicole F Dowling","doi":"10.1186/s12982-018-0081-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Participation in epidemiologic studies has declined, raising concerns about selection bias. While estimates derived from epidemiologic studies have been shown to be robust under a wide range of scenarios, additional empiric study is needed. The Georgia Study to Explore Early Development (GA SEED), a population-based case-control study of risk factors for autism spectrum disorder (ASD), provided an opportunity to explore factors associated with non-participation and potential impacts of non-participation on association studies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>GA SEED recruited preschool-aged children residing in metropolitan-Atlanta during 2007-2012. Children with ASD were identified from multiple schools and healthcare providers serving children with disabilities; children from the general population (POP) were randomly sampled from birth records. Recruitment was via mailed invitation letter with follow-up phone calls. Eligibility criteria included birth and current residence in study area and an English-speaking caregiver. Many children identified for potential inclusion could not be contacted. We used data from birth certificates to examine demographic and perinatal factors associated with participation in GA SEED and completion of the data collection protocol. We also compared ASD-risk factor associations for the final sample of children who completed the study with the initial sample of all likely ASD and POP children invited to potentially participate in the study, had they been eligible. Finally, we derived post-stratification sampling weights for participants who completed the study and compared weighted and unweighted associations between ASD and two factors collected via post-enrollment maternal interview: infertility and reproductive stoppage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Maternal age and education were independently associated with participation in the POP group. Maternal education was independently associated with participation in the ASD group. Numerous other demographic and perinatal factors were not associated with participation. Moreover, unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios for associations between ASD and several demographic and perinatal factors were similar between the final sample of study completers and the total invited sample. Odds ratios for associations between ASD and infertility and reproductive stoppage were also similar in unweighted and weighted analyses of the study completion sample.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that effect estimates from SEED risk factor analyses, particularly those of non-demographic factors, are likely robust.</p>","PeriodicalId":39896,"journal":{"name":"Emerging Themes in Epidemiology","volume":"15 ","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12982-018-0081-y","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emerging Themes in Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12982-018-0081-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Background: Participation in epidemiologic studies has declined, raising concerns about selection bias. While estimates derived from epidemiologic studies have been shown to be robust under a wide range of scenarios, additional empiric study is needed. The Georgia Study to Explore Early Development (GA SEED), a population-based case-control study of risk factors for autism spectrum disorder (ASD), provided an opportunity to explore factors associated with non-participation and potential impacts of non-participation on association studies.

Methods: GA SEED recruited preschool-aged children residing in metropolitan-Atlanta during 2007-2012. Children with ASD were identified from multiple schools and healthcare providers serving children with disabilities; children from the general population (POP) were randomly sampled from birth records. Recruitment was via mailed invitation letter with follow-up phone calls. Eligibility criteria included birth and current residence in study area and an English-speaking caregiver. Many children identified for potential inclusion could not be contacted. We used data from birth certificates to examine demographic and perinatal factors associated with participation in GA SEED and completion of the data collection protocol. We also compared ASD-risk factor associations for the final sample of children who completed the study with the initial sample of all likely ASD and POP children invited to potentially participate in the study, had they been eligible. Finally, we derived post-stratification sampling weights for participants who completed the study and compared weighted and unweighted associations between ASD and two factors collected via post-enrollment maternal interview: infertility and reproductive stoppage.

Results: Maternal age and education were independently associated with participation in the POP group. Maternal education was independently associated with participation in the ASD group. Numerous other demographic and perinatal factors were not associated with participation. Moreover, unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios for associations between ASD and several demographic and perinatal factors were similar between the final sample of study completers and the total invited sample. Odds ratios for associations between ASD and infertility and reproductive stoppage were also similar in unweighted and weighted analyses of the study completion sample.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that effect estimates from SEED risk factor analyses, particularly those of non-demographic factors, are likely robust.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在一项基于人群的病例对照研究中,评估无反应的人口统计学和围产期预测因素以及无反应对关联措施的影响:来自格鲁吉亚早期发育研究的发现。
背景:流行病学研究的参与率下降,引起了对选择偏差的担忧。虽然从流行病学研究中得出的估计数已被证明在广泛的情况下是可靠的,但还需要进行更多的经验性研究。乔治亚州早期发展研究(GA SEED)是一项基于人群的自闭症谱系障碍(ASD)危险因素的病例对照研究,为探索不参与关联研究的相关因素以及不参与关联研究的潜在影响提供了机会。方法:GA SEED招募2007-2012年居住在亚特兰大大都市的学龄前儿童。自闭症儿童来自多个为残疾儿童提供服务的学校和医疗机构;从一般人群(POP)中随机抽取出生记录中的儿童。招聘是通过邮寄邀请函和后续电话进行的。入选标准包括出生和目前在研究地区的居住地,以及一名会说英语的护理人员。许多被确定可能纳入的儿童无法联系上。我们使用出生证明的数据来检查与参与GA SEED和完成数据收集方案相关的人口统计学和围产期因素。我们还比较了完成研究的最终样本儿童与所有可能的ASD和POP儿童的初始样本,如果他们符合条件,他们可能参加研究。最后,我们得出了完成研究的参与者的分层后抽样权重,并比较了ASD与通过入组后母亲访谈收集的两个因素(不孕症和生殖停止)之间的加权和未加权关联。结果:产妇年龄和受教育程度与参加POP组有独立的相关性。母亲教育程度与参与ASD组独立相关。许多其他人口和围产期因素与参与无关。此外,ASD与一些人口统计学和围产期因素之间的关联的未调整和调整的比值比在最终完成研究的样本和全部邀请样本之间相似。在研究完成样本的未加权和加权分析中,ASD与不孕症和生殖停止之间关联的优势比也相似。结论:这些发现表明,SEED风险因素分析的影响估计,特别是那些非人口统计学因素,可能是可靠的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Emerging Themes in Epidemiology
Emerging Themes in Epidemiology Medicine-Epidemiology
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.30%
发文量
9
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Emerging Themes in Epidemiology is an open access, peer-reviewed, online journal that aims to promote debate and discussion on practical and theoretical aspects of epidemiology. Combining statistical approaches with an understanding of the biology of disease, epidemiologists seek to elucidate the social, environmental and host factors related to adverse health outcomes. Although research findings from epidemiologic studies abound in traditional public health journals, little publication space is devoted to discussion of the practical and theoretical concepts that underpin them. Because of its immediate impact on public health, an openly accessible forum is needed in the field of epidemiology to foster such discussion.
期刊最新文献
Explaining biological differences between men and women by gendered mechanisms. Population cause of death estimation using verbal autopsy methods in large-scale field trials of maternal and child health: lessons learned from a 20-year research collaboration in Central Ghana. Dynamics of COVID-19 progression and the long-term influences of measures on pandemic outcomes. Puberty health intervention to improve menstrual health and school attendance among adolescent girls in The Gambia: study methodology of a cluster-randomised controlled trial in rural Gambia (MEGAMBO TRIAL). Are verbatim transcripts necessary in applied qualitative research: experiences from two community-based intervention trials in Ghana.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1