PURPOSE: To evaluate the possible selection bias related to the differential participation of mobile phone users and non-users in a Finnish case-control study on mobile phone use and brain tumors. METHODS: Mobile phone use was investigated among 777 controls and 726 cases participating in the full personal interview (full participants), and 321 controls and 103 cases giving only a brief phone interview (incomplete participants). To assess selection bias, the Mantel-Haenszel estimate of odds ratio was calculated for three different groups: full study participants, incomplete participants, and a combined group consisting of both full and incomplete participants. RESULTS: Among controls, 83% of the full participants and 73% of the incomplete participants had regularly used a mobile phone. Among cases, the figures were 76% and 64%, respectively. The odds ratio for brain tumor based on the combined group of full and incomplete participants was slightly closer to unity than that based only on the full participants. CONCLUSIONS: Selection bias tends to distort the effect estimates below unity, while analyses based on more comprehensive material gave results close to unity.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the possible selection bias related to the differential participation of mobile phone users and non-users in a Finnish case-control study on mobile phone use and brain tumors. METHODS: Mobile phone use was investigated among 777 controls and 726 cases participating in the full personal interview (full participants), and 321 controls and 103 cases giving only a brief phone interview (incomplete participants). To assess selection bias, the Mantel-Haenszel estimate of odds ratio was calculated for three different groups: full study participants, incomplete participants, and a combined group consisting of both full and incomplete participants. RESULTS: Among controls, 83% of the full participants and 73% of the incomplete participants had regularly used a mobile phone. Among cases, the figures were 76% and 64%, respectively. The odds ratio for brain tumor based on the combined group of full and incomplete participants was slightly closer to unity than that based only on the full participants. CONCLUSIONS: Selection bias tends to distort the effect estimates below unity, while analyses based on more comprehensive material gave results close to unity.
Authors: Andrew E Grulich; Claire M Vajdic; Michael O Falster; Eleanor Kane; Karin Ekstrom Smedby; Paige M Bracci; Silvia de Sanjose; Nikolaus Becker; Jenny Turner; Otoniel Martinez-Maza; Mads Melbye; Eric A Engels; Paolo Vineis; Adele Seniori Costantini; Elizabeth A Holly; John J Spinelli; Carlo La Vecchia; Tongzhang Zheng; Brian C H Chiu; Silvia Franceschi; Pierluigi Cocco; Marc Maynadié; Lenka Foretova; Anthony Staines; Paul Brennan; Scott Davis; Richard K Severson; James R Cerhan; Elizabeth C Breen; Brenda Birmann; Wendy Cozen Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2010-08-18 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: F Momoli; J Siemiatycki; M L McBride; M-É Parent; L Richardson; D Bedard; R Platt; M Vrijheid; E Cardis; D Krewski Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Elisabeth Cardis; Lesley Richardson; Isabelle Deltour; Bruce Armstrong; Maria Feychting; Christoffer Johansen; Monique Kilkenny; Patricia McKinney; Baruch Modan; Siegal Sadetzki; Joachim Schüz; Anthony Swerdlow; Martine Vrijheid; Anssi Auvinen; Gabriele Berg; Maria Blettner; Joseph Bowman; Julianne Brown; Angela Chetrit; Helle Collatz Christensen; Angus Cook; Sarah Hepworth; Graham Giles; Martine Hours; Ivano Iavarone; Avital Jarus-Hakak; Lars Klaeboe; Daniel Krewski; Susanna Lagorio; Stefan Lönn; Simon Mann; Mary McBride; Kenneth Muir; Louise Nadon; Marie-Elise Parent; Neil Pearce; Tiina Salminen; Minouk Schoemaker; Brigitte Schlehofer; Jack Siemiatycki; Masao Taki; Toru Takebayashi; Tore Tynes; Martie van Tongeren; Paolo Vecchia; Joe Wiart; Alistair Woodward; Naohito Yamaguchi Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2007-07-18 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: Andreas Stang; Andrea Schmidt-Pokrzywniak; Timothy L Lash; Peter Karl Lommatzsch; Gerhard Taubert; Norbert Bornfeld; Karl-Heinz Jöckel Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2009-01-13 Impact factor: 13.506