Literature DB >> 26976281

Contactable Non-responders Show Different Characteristics Compared to Lost to Follow-Up Participants: Insights from an Australian Longitudinal Birth Cohort Study.

Shu-Kay Ng1, Rani Scott2, Paul A Scuffham2.   

Abstract

Objective This research aims to identify predictors of attrition in a longitudinal birth cohort study in Australia and assess differences in baseline characteristics and responses in subsequent follow-up phases between contactable non-responders and uncontactable non-responders deemed "lost to follow-up (LTF)". Methods 3368 women recruited from three public hospitals in Southeast Queensland and Northern New South Wales during antenatal visits in 2006-2011 completed a baseline questionnaire to elicit information on multiple domains of exposures. A follow-up questionnaire was posted to each participant at 1 year after birth to obtain mother's and child's health and development information. Multivariate logistic regression was used to model the association between exposures and respondents' status at 1 year. The effect of an inverse-probability-weighting method to adjust for non-response was studied. Results Overall attrition at 1-year was 35.4 %; major types of attrition were "contactable non-response" (27.6 %) and "LTF" (6.7 %). These two attrition types showed different responses at the 3-year follow-up and involved different predictors. Besides shared predictors (first language not English, higher risk of psychological distress, had smoked during pregnancy, higher levels of family conflict), distinguishable predictors of contactable non-responders were younger age, having moved home in the past year and having children under 16 in the household. Attrition rates increased substantially from 20 % in 2006 to 54 % in 2011. Conclusions This observed trend of increased attrition rates raises concern about the use of traditional techniques, such as "paper-based" questionnaires, in longitudinal cohort studies. The supplementary use of electronic communications, such as online survey tools and smart-device applications, could provide a better alternative.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attrition; Birth cohort; Epidemiology; Longitudinal studies; Socio-demographic

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26976281     DOI: 10.1007/s10995-016-1946-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Matern Child Health J        ISSN: 1092-7875


  31 in total

1.  An application of a weighting method to adjust for nonresponse in standardized incidence ratio analysis of cohort studies.

Authors:  R Sowmya Rao; Alice J Sigurdson; Michele Morin Doody; Barry I Graubard
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.797

2.  Enrollment and response rates in a longitudinal birth cohort.

Authors:  Jean Golding; Karen Birmingham
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 3.980

Review 3.  Review of inverse probability weighting for dealing with missing data.

Authors:  Shaun R Seaman; Ian R White
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2011-01-10       Impact factor: 3.021

4.  Linking data from the Multiethnic Cohort Study to Medicare data: linkage results and application to chronic disease research.

Authors:  Veronica Wendy Setiawan; Beth A Virnig; Jacqueline Porcel; Brian E Henderson; Loïc Le Marchand; Lynne R Wilkens; Kristine R Monroe
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-04-04       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Predictors of attrition among children born in a PMTCT programme in Zimbabwe followed up over 5 years.

Authors:  Nyaradzai E Kurewa; Felicity Z Gumbo; Paul M Mapingure; Marshall W Munjoma; Mike Z Chirenje; Simbarashe Rusakaniko; Babill Stray-Pedersen
Journal:  J Trop Pediatr       Date:  2012-01-19       Impact factor: 1.165

6.  Does attrition bias longitudinal population-based studies on back pain?

Authors:  Carsten O Schmidt; Heiner Raspe; Michael Pfingsten; Monika Hasenbring; Heinz Dieter Basler; Wolfgang Eich; Thomas Kohlmann
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 3.931

7.  Sociodemographic and psychiatric determinants of attrition in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA).

Authors:  Femke Lamers; Adriaan W Hoogendoorn; Johannes H Smit; Richard van Dyck; Frans G Zitman; Willem A Nolen; Brenda W Penninx
Journal:  Compr Psychiatry       Date:  2011-03-11       Impact factor: 3.735

8.  Home and community care services: a major opportunity for preventive health care.

Authors:  Louisa R Jorm; Scott R Walter; Sanja Lujic; Julie E Byles; Hal L Kendig
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2010-05-22       Impact factor: 3.921

9.  Selection bias modeling using observed data augmented with imputed record-level probabilities.

Authors:  Caroline A Thompson; Onyebuchi A Arah
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 3.797

10.  Environments For Healthy Living (EFHL) Griffith birth cohort study: characteristics of sample and profile of antenatal exposures.

Authors:  Cate M Cameron; Paul A Scuffham; Rania Shibl; Shukay Ng; Rani Scott; Anneliese Spinks; Gabor Mihala; Andrew Wilson; Elizabeth Kendall; Neil Sipe; Roderick J McClure
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2012-12-15       Impact factor: 3.295

View more
  5 in total

1.  Sexual Minority Women in Longitudinal Survey Research: Is Attrition a Problem?

Authors:  Alice Campbell; Francisco Perales; Janeen Baxter
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2020-04-08

2.  Impact of participant attrition on child injury outcome estimates: a longitudinal birth cohort study in Australia.

Authors:  Cate M Cameron; Jodie M Osborne; Anneliese B Spinks; Tamzyn M Davey; Neil Sipe; Roderick J McClure
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Samantha Teague; George J Youssef; Jacqui A Macdonald; Emma Sciberras; Adrian Shatte; Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz; Chris Greenwood; Jennifer McIntosh; Craig A Olsson; Delyse Hutchinson
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Perinatal Biochemical Confirmation of Smoking Status by Trimester.

Authors:  Kristin Ashford; Amanda Wiggins; Emily Rayens; Sara Assef; Amanda Fallin; Mary Kay Rayens
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 4.244

5.  Queensland Family Cohort: a study protocol.

Authors:  Danielle Borg; Kym Rae; Corrine Fiveash; Johanna Schagen; Janelle James-McAlpine; Frances Friedlander; Claire Thurston; Maria Oliveri; Theresa Harmey; Erika Cavanagh; Christopher Edwards; Davide Fontanarosa; Tony Perkins; Greig de Zubicaray; Karen Moritz; Sailesh Kumar; Vicki Clifton
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.