OBJECTIVE: To quantify the residential mobility rate in a population of pregnant women expecting their first baby. METHOD: We verified residential mobility in a cohort of 585 primiparous Australian women who were enrolled in late pregnancy and had participated in a randomised controlled trial and followed-up to at least 16 weeks post-partum. RESULTS: We found a residential mobility rate of 19%. Movers and non-movers differed by socio-demographic factors, with movers more likely be younger, relative risk (RR)=2.14 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41-3.13), and not living with a partner RR=2.46 (95% CI 1.60-3.77). CONCLUSION: Most prospective epidemiological studies can expect some attrition in the study population. The family formation period is acknowledged as a highly mobile time and this mobility may contribute to loss to follow-up. IMPLICATIONS: Researchers planning prospective studies in pregnant populations should consider the impact of residential mobility, especially differential mobility, and implement strategies to reduce attrition and optimise response rates.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the residential mobility rate in a population of pregnant women expecting their first baby. METHOD: We verified residential mobility in a cohort of 585 primiparous Australian women who were enrolled in late pregnancy and had participated in a randomised controlled trial and followed-up to at least 16 weeks post-partum. RESULTS: We found a residential mobility rate of 19%. Movers and non-movers differed by socio-demographic factors, with movers more likely be younger, relative risk (RR)=2.14 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41-3.13), and not living with a partner RR=2.46 (95% CI 1.60-3.77). CONCLUSION: Most prospective epidemiological studies can expect some attrition in the study population. The family formation period is acknowledged as a highly mobile time and this mobility may contribute to loss to follow-up. IMPLICATIONS: Researchers planning prospective studies in pregnant populations should consider the impact of residential mobility, especially differential mobility, and implement strategies to reduce attrition and optimise response rates.
Authors: Frances B Saadeh; Melissa A Clark; Michelle L Rogers; Crystal D Linkletter; Maureen G Phipps; James F Padbury; Patrick M Vivier Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2013-02
Authors: Erin E Bennett; Katie M Lynch; Xiaohui Xu; Eun Sug Park; Qi Ying; Jingkai Wei; Richard L Smith; James D Stewart; Eric A Whitsel; Melinda C Power Journal: Health Place Date: 2022-03-02 Impact factor: 4.931
Authors: Carol J R Hogue; Corette B Parker; Marian Willinger; Jeff R Temple; Carla M Bann; Robert M Silver; Donald J Dudley; Matthew A Koch; Donald R Coustan; Barbara J Stoll; Uma M Reddy; Michael W Varner; George R Saade; Deborah Conway; Robert L Goldenberg Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2013-03-26 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Christine L Roberts; Jonathan M Morris; Kristen R Rickard; Warwick B Giles; Judy M Simpson; George Kotsiou; Jennifer R Bowen Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2011-03-11 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Samantha J Lain; Charles S Algert; Vitomir Tasevski; Jonathan M Morris; Christine L Roberts Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2009-07-09 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: M S Pearce; S V Glinianaia; J Rankin; S Rushton; M Charlton; L Parker; T Pless-Mulloli Journal: Environ Res Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 6.498