Literature DB >> 19126583

Methodological issues in analyzing time trends in biologic fertility: protection bias.

Jane Key1, Nicky Best, Michael Joffe, Tina Kold Jensen, Niels Keiding.   

Abstract

One method of assessing biologic fertility is to measure time to pregnancy (TTP). Accidental pregnancies do not generate a valid TTP value and lead to nonrandom missing data if couples experiencing accidental pregnancies are more fertile than the general population. If factors affecting the rate of accidental pregnancies, such as availability of effective contraception and induced abortion, vary over time, then the result may be protection bias in the estimates of fertility time trends. Six European data sets were analyzed to investigate whether evidence of protection bias exists in TTP studies of fertility trends in Europe over the past 50 years. Couples experiencing accidental pregnancies tended to be more fertile than the general population. However, trends in accidental pregnancy rates were inconsistent across countries and were insufficient to produce substantial bias in fertility trends in simulated data. Where protection bias is suspected, the authors demonstrate use of 2 multiple imputation methods to generate realizations for the missing TTP values for accidental pregnancies. Simulation studies show that both methods successfully reduce or eliminate protection bias. The authors also demonstrate that standard sensitivity analyses for dealing with accidental pregnancies provide an upper bound on the extent of any bias.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19126583     DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwn302

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


  7 in total

1.  Semen quality analysis and the idea of normal fertility.

Authors:  Michael Joffe
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.285

2.  Childhood social hardships and fertility: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Emily W Harville; Renée Boynton-Jarrett
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.797

3.  Adverse childhood event experiences, fertility difficulties and menstrual cycle characteristics.

Authors:  Marni B Jacobs; Renee D Boynton-Jarrett; Emily W Harville
Journal:  J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 2.949

4.  Estimating infertility prevalence in low-to-middle-income countries: an application of a current duration approach to Demographic and Health Survey data.

Authors:  Chelsea B Polis; Carie M Cox; Özge Tunçalp; Alexander C McLain; Marie E Thoma
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Improved Fecundity in Northern China: A Secular Trend from 1980 to 2003.

Authors:  Xiaobing Tian; Jingmei Jiang; Jiedong Wang; Shucheng Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-10-27       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  A novel nonparametric measure of explained variation for survival data with an easy graphical interpretation.

Authors:  Verena Weiß; Matthias Schmidt; Martin Hellmich
Journal:  Ger Med Sci       Date:  2015-10-29

7.  A cohort study evaluation of maternal PCB exposure related to time to pregnancy in daughters.

Authors:  Chris Gennings; Caroline Carrico; Pam Factor-Litvak; Nickilou Krigbaum; Piera M Cirillo; Barbara A Cohn
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2013-08-20       Impact factor: 5.984

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.