Literature DB >> 12076890

Using a telephone survey to acquire genetic and behavioral data related to cigarette smoking in "made-anonymous" and "registry" samples.

Lynn T Kozlowski1, George P Vogler, David J Vandenbergh, Andrew A Strasser, Richard J O'Connor, Berwood A Yost.   

Abstract

In the Smokers and Nonsmokers Study, the authors investigated the feasibility of using random digit dialing telephone interviews to locate adults in the continental United States who were willing to provide DNA from buccal swabs through the mail. Interviews with 3,383 adults regarding their smoking-related behaviors (response rate = 70%) were conducted in 1999-2000; swab returns continued into early 2001. Overall, 57% of interviewees agreed to receive mailed information explaining the study. Better-educated persons (odds ratio (OR) = 1.3, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1, 1.6), younger persons (OR = 0.988, 95% CI: 0.983, 0.992), persons with symptoms of depression (OR = 1.8, 95% CI: 1.4, 2.4), and current smokers (OR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.8, 2.8) were likelier to agree to receive a mailing. Approximately 26% of interviewees (45% of those receiving kits) returned buccal swabs, and 18% were successfully genotyped. Older (OR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.03), better-educated (OR = 1.4, 95% CI: 1.1, 1.7), and White (OR = 1.8, 95% CI: 1.4, 2.5) participants were more likely to return DNA samples, but current smokers (OR = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8) were less likely to do so. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two forms of participation: the "registry" group (names were kept on file) or the "made-anonymous" group (names were unassociated with samples). The two groups were equally likely to return kits, but registry respondents were more likely to nominate siblings for participation in the study (OR = 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1). The participants in this study were similar demographically to the national population. The authors conclude that random digit dialing surveys coupled with mail collection of DNA may constitute a practical method of obtaining DNA samples for biobehavioral research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12076890     DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwf010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0002-9262            Impact factor:   4.897


  12 in total

1.  Hypothetical and factual willingness to participate in biobank research.

Authors:  Linus Johnsson; Gert Helgesson; Thorunn Rafnar; Ingibjorg Halldorsdottir; Kee-Seng Chia; Stefan Eriksson; Mats G Hansson
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 2.  One-time general consent for research on biological samples.

Authors:  David Wendler
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-03-04

3.  New saliva DNA collection method compared to buccal cell collection techniques for epidemiological studies.

Authors:  Nikki L Rogers; Shelley A Cole; Hao-Chang Lan; Aldo Crossa; Ellen W Demerath
Journal:  Am J Hum Biol       Date:  2007 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.937

4.  Recruiting for diversity: a pilot test of recruitment strategies for a national alcohol survey with mail-in genetic data collection.

Authors:  Karen G Chartier; Priscilla Martinez; Cory Cummings; Brien P Riley; Katherine J Karriker-Jaffe
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2021-01-04

5.  Genetic research participation in a young adult community sample.

Authors:  Carla L Storr; Flora Or; William W Eaton; Nicholas Ialongo
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2014-06-20

6.  Consent for genetics studies among clinical trial participants: findings from Action for Health in Diabetes (Look AHEAD).

Authors:  M A Espeland; K Dotson; S A Jaramillo; S E Kahn; B Harrison; M Montez; J P Foreyt; B Montgomery; W C Knowler
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.486

7.  New strategies for biosample collection in population-based social research.

Authors:  Heather H Gatny; Mick P Couper; William G Axinn
Journal:  Soc Sci Res       Date:  2013-03-22

8.  ITC "spit and butts" pilot study: the feasibility of collecting saliva and cigarette butt samples from smokers to evaluate policy.

Authors:  Brian V Fix; Richard O'Connor; David Hammond; Bill King; Ann McNeill; James Thrasher; Marcelo Boado; K Michael Cummings; Hua-Hie Yong; Mary E Thompson; Andrew Hyland
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 4.244

9.  Patient characteristics and participation in a genetic study: a type 2 diabetes cohort.

Authors:  Loabat Amiri; Andrea E Cassidy-Bushrow; Heather Dakki; Jia Li; Karen Wells; Susan A Oliveria; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Abraham Thomas; David E Lanfear
Journal:  J Investig Med       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.895

10.  Factors affecting maternal participation in the genetic component of the National Birth Defects Prevention Study-United States, 1997-2007.

Authors:  Jill Glidewell; Jennita Reefhuis; Sonja A Rasmussen; Alison Woomert; Charlotte Hobbs; Paul A Romitti; Krista S Crider
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-09-26       Impact factor: 8.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.