Literature DB >> 1917231

The effects of non-response in a prospective study of cancer: 15-year follow-up.

L K Heilbrun1, A Nomura, G N Stemmermann.   

Abstract

Out of 11,136 Japanese men identified on the island of Oahu, Hawaii in 1965 by the Honolulu Heart Program, 8006 responded to a mailed questionnaire and were examined. Some 1871 responded only to the mailed questionnaire, and 1259 did not respond at all. After 15 years of follow-up, the examined men had significantly lower risk of death from all causes and death from cancer. Minor differences were also noted between the two groups in the risk of cancer of the lung, stomach, colon, and rectum. However, the examined men had a significantly higher risk of prostate cancer. In general, the strength of these non-response effects was mainly due to risk differences in the first five years of the 15-year follow-up period. The relative risk (RR) of each of the seven endpoint events tended towards 1.0 as each of the three successive five-year follow-up intervals were considered. An exception to this was the prostate cancer incidence RR which favoured the unexamined men throughout the entire 15 years, but significantly so only in the last five-year follow-up interval. When the 8006 examined and 1871 unexamined men who responded to the mailed questionnaire were evaluated with respect to the association of cigarette smoking with lung cancer incidence, the RR for smokers was 9.77 for the examined men, and 6.73 for the unexamined men. Since these RRs are not significantly different, there should be little bias in RR estimates of cigarette smoking for lung cancer if the observation was limited to only the examined men. With regard to the association of body mass index (BMI) with colon cancer in older men, the RRs for men in the highest BMI quintile were quite comparable, at 1.37 for the examined group and 1.60 for the unexamined men. We conclude that although some non-response effects on cancer incidence exist in this cohort, they do not appear to be serious enough to have changed conclusions drawn about risk relationships.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1917231     DOI: 10.1093/ije/20.2.328

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  11 in total

1.  Longitudinal patterns in survival, comorbidity, healthcare utilization and quality of care among older women following breast cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Amresh D Hanchate; Kerri M Clough-Gorr; Arlene S Ash; Soe Soe Thwin; Rebecca A Silliman
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Investigation of relative risk estimates from studies of the same population with contrasting response rates and designs.

Authors:  Nicole M Mealing; Emily Banks; Louisa R Jorm; David G Steel; Mark S Clements; Kris D Rogers
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  A longitudinal study of policy effect (smoke-free legislation) on smoking norms: ITC Scotland/United Kingdom.

Authors:  Abraham Brown; Crawford Moodie; Gerard Hastings
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 4.244

4.  Hip fracture prevention with a multifactorial educational program in elderly community-dwelling Finnish women.

Authors:  T Pekkarinen; E Löyttyniemi; M Välimäki
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-05-08       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Relationships between respiratory symptoms and FEV1 in men and women with normal lung function: The Korean Health and Genome Study.

Authors:  Chol Shin; Sungim Lee; Robert D Abbott; Je Hyeong Kim; Sang Yeub Lee; Kwang Ho In; KuChan Kimm
Journal:  Lung       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.584

6.  Risk factor effects and total mortality in older Japanese men in Japan and Hawaii.

Authors:  Robert D Abbott; Hirotsugu Ueshima; Atsushi Hozawa; Tomonori Okamura; Takashi Kadowaki; Katsuyuki Miura; Nagako Okuda; Yasuyuki Nakamura; Akira Okayama; Yoshikuni Kita; Beatriz L Rodriguez; Katsuhiko Yano; J David Curb
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.797

7.  Non-response to baseline, non-response to follow-up and mortality in the Whitehall II cohort.

Authors:  Jane E Ferrie; Mika Kivimäki; Archana Singh-Manoux; Alison Shortt; Pekka Martikainen; Jenny Head; Michael Marmot; David Gimeno; Roberto De Vogli; Marko Elovainio; Martin J Shipley
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 7.196

8.  Are risk estimates biased in follow-up studies of psychosocial factors with low base-line participation?

Authors:  Linda Kaerlev; Henrik A Kolstad; Ase Marie Hansen; Jane Frølund Thomsen; Anette Kærgaard; Reiner Rugulies; Sigurd Mikkelsen; Johan Hviid Andersen; Ole Mors; Matias B Grynderup; Jens Peter Bonde
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-07-08       Impact factor: 3.295

9.  Loss to follow-up in cohort studies: bias in estimates of socioeconomic inequalities.

Authors:  Laura D Howe; Kate Tilling; Bruna Galobardes; Debbie A Lawlor
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.822

10.  Participation in a Prospective Cohort Study on Melanoma did not Affect the Incidence and Mortality of the Studied Disease.

Authors:  Åsa M Ingvar; Håkan Olsson; Per Broberg; Karolin Isaksson; Christian Ingvar; Kari Nielsen
Journal:  Acta Derm Venereol       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 3.875

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.