Literature DB >> 7246521

The effect of response bias on the odds ratio.

M A Austin, M H Criqui, E Barrett-Connor, M J Holdbrook.   

Abstract

The effect of response bias on odds ratio results was determined based on data from a population-based cardiovascular disease survey. The study subjects consisted of 5000 adult residents of a predominantly white, upper-middle class community. Information from 60% of the 1100 non-respondents was obtained by telephone. Consistent patterns of participation associated with risk factors and diseases under study were found. A simple error term was developed to convert the odds ratio for respondents to the odds ratio for the target population using individual cell response rates. This error term demonstrates that the response patterns found tended to minimize the error in odds ratio calculations for respondents. Only by obtaining relevant information on non-respondents can investigators accurately estimate response bias and its effects on the odds ratio.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1981        PMID: 7246521     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113160

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


  32 in total

1.  Assessing non-response to a mailed health survey including self-collection of biological material.

Authors:  Anneli Uusküla; Mart Kals; Louise-Anne McNutt
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2010-05-10       Impact factor: 3.367

2.  Nonresponse research--an underdeveloped field in epidemiology.

Authors:  Andreas Stang
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 8.082

3.  Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.

Authors:  Andreas Stang
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-07-22       Impact factor: 8.082

4.  A multiphase design strategy for dealing with participation bias.

Authors:  S Haneuse; J Chen
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Pathways to evidence-based knowledge in orthopaedic surgery: an international survey of AO course participants.

Authors:  Sabine Goldhahn; Laurent Audigé; David L Helfet; Beate Hanson
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2005-01-13       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  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

7.  Selection by socioeconomic factors into the Danish National Birth Cohort.

Authors:  Tine Neermann Jacobsen; Ellen Aagaard Nohr; Morten Frydenberg
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-03-27       Impact factor: 8.082

Review 8.  [Systematic errors in clinical studies : A comprehensive survey].

Authors:  W A Golder
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 1.059

9.  Chronic venous disease in an ethnically diverse population: the San Diego Population Study.

Authors:  Michael H Criqui; Maritess Jamosmos; Arnost Fronek; Julie O Denenberg; Robert D Langer; John Bergan; Beatrice A Golomb
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2003-09-01       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  The CONSTANCES cohort: an open epidemiological laboratory.

Authors:  Marie Zins; Sébastien Bonenfant; Matthieu Carton; Mireille Coeuret-Pellicer; Alice Guéguen; Julie Gourmelen; Mélissa Nachtigal; Anna Ozguler; Ariane Quesnot; Céline Ribet; Grégory Rodrigues; Angel Serrano; Rémi Sitta; Alain Brigand; Joseph Henny; Marcel Goldberg
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-08-12       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.