RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The rates of enrollment of volunteers for brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies vary by demographic and clinical characteristics. We use data from a large MRI study to identify factors associated with differential enrollment and to examine potential biases this may produce in study results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Results from recruitment of 1,431 women into the MRI substudy of the Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS-MRI) are described. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to estimate the degree of bias associated with missing data on estimates of risk factor relationships. RESULTS: Of 2,345 women contacted from an established cohort of women older than 70 years of age, 72% consented to undergo screening for WHIMS-MRI. Scanning was ultimately completed on 61%. Completion rates varied according to a range of sociodemographic, lifestyle, and clinical characteristics that may be related to study outcomes. Plausible levels of selective enrollment in magnetic resonance imaging studies may produce moderate biases (< +/-20%) in characterizations of risk factor relationships. Adverse events, such as claustrophobia, occurred during 1.7% of the attempted scans and, in 0.8% of instances, led to lost data. CONCLUSIONS: Enrollment of older women into brain imaging studies is feasible, although selection biases may limit how well study cohorts reflect more general populations.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: The rates of enrollment of volunteers for brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies vary by demographic and clinical characteristics. We use data from a large MRI study to identify factors associated with differential enrollment and to examine potential biases this may produce in study results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Results from recruitment of 1,431 women into the MRI substudy of the Women's Health Initiative Memory Study (WHIMS-MRI) are described. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to estimate the degree of bias associated with missing data on estimates of risk factor relationships. RESULTS: Of 2,345 women contacted from an established cohort of women older than 70 years of age, 72% consented to undergo screening for WHIMS-MRI. Scanning was ultimately completed on 61%. Completion rates varied according to a range of sociodemographic, lifestyle, and clinical characteristics that may be related to study outcomes. Plausible levels of selective enrollment in magnetic resonance imaging studies may produce moderate biases (< +/-20%) in characterizations of risk factor relationships. Adverse events, such as claustrophobia, occurred during 1.7% of the attempted scans and, in 0.8% of instances, led to lost data. CONCLUSIONS: Enrollment of older women into brain imaging studies is feasible, although selection biases may limit how well study cohorts reflect more general populations.
Authors: R N Bryan; T A Manolio; L D Schertz; C Jungreis; V C Poirier; A D Elster; R A Kronmal Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1994-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: W T Longstreth; T A Manolio; A Arnold; G L Burke; N Bryan; C A Jungreis; P L Enright; D O'Leary; L Fried Journal: Stroke Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jacques E Rossouw; Garnet L Anderson; Ross L Prentice; Andrea Z LaCroix; Charles Kooperberg; Marcia L Stefanick; Rebecca D Jackson; Shirley A A Beresford; Barbara V Howard; Karen C Johnson; Jane Morley Kotchen; Judith Ockene Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-07-17 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: M Haan; M A Espeland; B E Klein; R Casanova; S A Gaussoin; R D Jackson; A E Millen; S M Resnick; J E Rossouw; S A Shumaker; R Wallace; K Yaffe Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-03-14 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Cheng Chen; Pengcheng Xun; Joel D Kaufman; Kathleen M Hayden; Mark A Espeland; Eric A Whitsel; Marc L Serre; William Vizuete; Tonya Orchard; William S Harris; Xinhui Wang; Helena C Chui; Jiu-Chiuan Chen; Ka He Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-07-15 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Ramon Casanova; Ryan T Barnard; Sarah A Gaussoin; Santiago Saldana; Kathleen M Hayden; JoAnn E Manson; Robert B Wallace; Stephen R Rapp; Susan M Resnick; Mark A Espeland; Jiu-Chiuan Chen Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2018-08-18 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Joseph S Goveas; Mark A Espeland; Patricia Hogan; Vonetta Dotson; Sergey Tarima; Laura H Coker; Judith Ockene; Robert Brunner; Nancy F Woods; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller; Jane M Kotchen; Susan Resnick Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2011-02-24 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Laura H Coker; Mark A Espeland; Stephen R Rapp; Claudine Legault; Susan M Resnick; Patricia Hogan; Sarah Gaussoin; Maggie Dailey; Sally A Shumaker Journal: J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Date: 2009-11-22 Impact factor: 4.292
Authors: Janet A Tooze; Sarah A Gaussoin; Susan M Resnick; Nancy J Fischbein; Jennifer G Robinson; R Nick Bryan; Yang An; Mark A Espeland Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2009-11-21 Impact factor: 3.282