Literature DB >> 2589302

Response bias in the Honolulu Heart Program.

R Benfante1, D Reed, C MacLean, A Kagan.   

Abstract

The 14-year incidence rates (1969-1982) for coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease (stroke), total mortality, and cause-specific mortality were compared between 8,006 examined and 3,130 nonexamined men of the Honolulu Heart Program using identical surveillance procedures. There was a significant decrease in examination participation with increasing age. Examined men smoked less, weighed more, had a higher level of education, and had a lower percentage of never-married status than did nonexamined men. Total mortality rates, cancer mortality rates, and coronary heart disease incidence rates were higher in nonexamined men, while there were no differences in stroke rates. The average annual response error for total mortality and coronary heart disease rates was underestimated at 8.7% and 5.4%, respectively. The differences in rates were greatest during the first half of the follow-up period and converged during the second half. By the end of 10 years, there were no differences between nonexamined and examined men for any of the endpoints studied. The pattern of convergence of rates suggests a diminishing healthy participant advantage over time. In conclusion, a response bias did occur in this study, but the effect was small and did not alter any of the earlier findings concerning the relative incidence of cardiovascular disease. Because the degree of response bias can vary widely depending on when during follow-up a particular analysis is undertaken, it is recommended that prospective studies monitor, insofar as possible, a sample of nonparticipants in order to ensure valid results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2589302     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115436

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


  23 in total

1.  A prospective study of household smoking bans and subsequent cessation related behaviour: the role of stage of change.

Authors:  B A Pizacani; D P Martin; M J Stark; T D Koepsell; B Thompson; P Diehr
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Response rates and response bias for 50 surveys of pediatricians.

Authors:  William L Cull; Karen G O'Connor; Sanford Sharp; Suk-fong S Tang
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Effect of population screening for type 2 diabetes on mortality: long-term follow-up of the Ely cohort.

Authors:  R K Simmons; M Rahman; R W Jakes; M F Yuyun; A R Niggebrugge; S H Hennings; D R R Williams; N J Wareham; S J Griffin
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 10.122

4.  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

5.  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

6.  Assessing the Potential for Bias From Nonresponse to a Study Follow-up Interview: An Example From the Agricultural Health Study.

Authors:  Jessica L Rinsky; David B Richardson; Steve Wing; John D Beard; Michael Alavanja; Laura E Beane Freeman; Honglei Chen; Paul K Henneberger; Freya Kamel; Dale P Sandler; Jane A Hoppin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  A demonstration of the impact of response bias on the results of patient satisfaction surveys.

Authors:  Kathleen M Mazor; Brian E Clauser; Terry Field; Robert A Yood; Jerry H Gurwitz
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Health and demographic characteristics of respondents in an Australian national sexuality survey: comparison with population norms.

Authors:  D M Purdie; M P Dunne; F M Boyle; M D Cook; J M Najman
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 3.710

9.  Effects of self-reported health conditions and pesticide exposures on probability of follow-up in a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Martha P Montgomery; Freya Kamel; Jane A Hoppin; Laura E Beane Freeman; Michael C R Alavanja; Dale P Sandler
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 2.214

10.  Comparison of participants and non-participants to the ORISCAV-LUX population-based study on cardiovascular risk factors in Luxembourg.

Authors:  Ala'a Alkerwi; Nicolas Sauvageot; Sophie Couffignal; Adelin Albert; Marie-Lise Lair; Michèle Guillaume
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2010-09-07       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.