Literature DB >> 29706754

Understanding and Preventing Loss to Follow-up: Experiences From the Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems.

Hwasoon Kim1, Gary R Cutter2, Brandon George3, Yuying Chen4.   

Abstract

Background: One of the most critical threats to the validity of any longitudinal research is the bias caused by study attrition. Prevention efforts should be focused on those individuals at high risk of non-participation to improve the generalizability of study findings. Objective: To identify demographic and clinical factors associated with loss to follow-up (FU) at post-injury years 1 to 35 among 25,871 people with spinal cord injury (SCI) enrolled in the National Spinal Cord Injury Database.
Methods: Loss to FU was defined as no research information obtained from participants who were eligible for the planned data collection. Generalized linear mixed models were used for analysis of factors at each post-injury year.
Results: The loss to FU rates were 23.1% and 32.9% for post-injury years 1 and 5, respectively, and remained >40% between post-injury years 20 and 35. The FU rate varied by study sites and was improved in recent injury cohorts. People who were more seriously injured and those who attained higher levels of education were more likely to return for FU than their counterparts. People who were at risk of being marginalized in society (non-whites, those with less education, the unemployed, victims of violence, and those with no health insurance) had the highest odds of being lost to FU across all post-injury years.
Conclusion: These findings can be used to identify individuals who are less likely to participate in follow-up, which may allow targeted attention to improve their response rate.

Entities:  

Keywords:  missing data; spinal cord injuries; study retention

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29706754      PMCID: PMC5915110          DOI: 10.1310/sci2402-97

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil        ISSN: 1082-0744


  22 in total

1.  Loss to follow-up in cohort studies: how much is too much?

Authors:  Vicki Kristman; Michael Manno; Pierre Côté
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  The SORG nomogram accurately predicts 3- and 12-months survival for operable spine metastatic disease: External validation.

Authors:  Nuno Rui Paulino Pereira; Lily Mclaughlin; Stein J Janssen; Cornelis N van Dijk; Jos A M Bramer; Ilya Laufer; Mark H Bilsky; Joseph H Schwab
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 3.454

3.  International Spinal Cord Injury Core Data Set (version 2.0)-including standardization of reporting.

Authors:  F Biering-Sørensen; M J DeVivo; S Charlifue; Y Chen; P W New; V Noonan; M W M Post; L Vogel
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 2.772

4.  Systematic bias in traumatic brain injury outcome studies because of loss to follow-up.

Authors:  John D Corrigan; Cynthia Harrison-Felix; Jennifer Bogner; Marcel Dijkers; Melissa Sendroy Terrill; Gale Whiteneck
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  Sociodemographic, clinical, and psychological factors associated with attrition in a prospective study of cardiovascular prevention: the Heart Strategies Concentrating on Risk Evaluation study.

Authors:  Claudia E Bambs; Kevin E Kip; Suresh R Mulukutla; Aryan N Aiyer; Cheryl Johnson; Lee Ann McDowell; Karen Matthews; Steven E Reis
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2013-03-25       Impact factor: 3.797

6.  Computer and internet use by persons after traumatic spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Naomi Goodman; Alan M Jette; Bethlyn Houlihan; Steve Williams
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.966

7.  Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems: Review of Program and National Database From 1970 to 2015.

Authors:  Yuying Chen; Michael J DeVivo; J Scott Richards; Theresa B SanAgustin
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.966

8.  Investigation of bias due to loss of participants in a Dutch multicentre prospective spinal cord injury cohort study.

Authors:  Sonja de Groot; Janneke A Haisma; Marcel W M Post; Floris W A van Asbeck; Lucas H V van der Woude
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.912

9.  Predicting C5 palsy via the use of preoperative anatomic measurements.

Authors:  Daniel Lubelski; Adeeb Derakhshan; Amy S Nowacki; Jeffrey C Wang; Michael P Steinmetz; Edward C Benzel; Thomas E Mroz
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-11-10       Impact factor: 4.166

10.  The impact of loss to follow-up on hypothesis tests of the treatment effect for several statistical methods in substance abuse clinical trials.

Authors:  Sarra L Hedden; Robert F Woolson; Rickey E Carter; Yuko Palesch; Himanshu P Upadhyaya; Robert J Malcolm
Journal:  J Subst Abuse Treat       Date:  2008-11-13
View more
  4 in total

1.  Can the LACE index help identify uninsured patients at risk of loss to follow-up during a pharmacist-led transitions of care program?

Authors:  Chiahung Chou; Cassidi C McDaniel; Shelby M Harris; Tim C Lai; Jeanna Sewell
Journal:  J Am Pharm Assoc (2003)       Date:  2021-11-03

2.  Factors related to dropout in integrative oncology clinical trials: interim analysis of an ongoing comparative effectiveness trial of mindfulness-based cancer recovery and Tai chi/Qigong for cancer health (The MATCH study).

Authors:  Devesh Oberoi; Katherine-Ann L Piedalue; Hassan Pirbhai; Steven Guirguis; Daniel Santa Mina; Linda E Carlson
Journal:  BMC Res Notes       Date:  2020-07-17

3.  Visualising statistical models using dynamic nomograms.

Authors:  Amirhossein Jalali; Alberto Alvarez-Iglesias; Davood Roshan; John Newell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-15       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Risk-guided maternity care to enhance maternal empowerment postpartum: A cluster randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Jacqueline Lagendijk; Meertien K Sijpkens; Hiske E Ernst-Smelt; Sarah B Verbiest; Jasper V Been; Eric A P Steegers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-11-20       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.