PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 7, 2018Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica388 citationsOpen Access

How to investigate and adjust for selection bias in cohort studies

View Full Paper
ENEllen A. NøhrZLZeyan Liew

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Longitudinal cohort studies can provide important evidence about preventable causes of disease, but the success relies heavily on the commitment of their participants, both at recruitment and during follow up. Initial participation rates have decreased in recent decades as have willingness to participate in subsequent follow ups. It is important to examine how such selection affects the validity of the results. In this article, we describe the conceptual framework for selection bias due to nonparticipation and loss to follow up in cohort studies, using both a traditional epidemiological approach and directed acyclic graphs. Methods to quantify selection bias are introduced together with analytical strategies to adjust for the bias including controlling for covariates associated with selection, inverse probability weighting and bias analysis. We use several studies conducted in the Danish National Birth Cohort as examples of how to quantify selection bias and also understand the underlying selection mechanisms. Although women who chose to participate in this cohort were typically of higher social status, healthier and with less disease than all those eligible for study, differential selection was modest and the influence of selection bias on several selected exposure-outcome associations was limited. These findings are reassuring and support enrolling a subset of motivated participants who would engage in long-term follow up rather than prioritize representativeness. Some of the presented methods are applicable even with limited data on nonparticipants and those lost to follow up, and can also be applied to other study designs such as case-control studies and surveys.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Nøhr et al. (2018) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a04fe6523c12501a19127aehttps://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13319
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Does Low Participation in Cohort Studies Induce Bias?2006 · 574 citations
  2. 2Examining Nonparticipation in the Maternal Follow-up Within the Danish National Birth Cohort2018 · 37 citations
  3. 3Maternal Pesticide Exposure from Multiple Sources and Selected Congenital Anomalies1999 · 1,770 citations
  4. 4The Malmö diet and cancer study: representativity, cancer incidence and mortality in participants and non-participants2001 · 554 citations
  5. 5THE EFFECT OF RESPONSE BIAS ON THE ODDS RATIO1981 · 130 citations