RT Journal Article
T1 Determinants of non- response to a second assessment of lifestyle factors and body weight in the EPIC-PANACEA study.
A1 May, Anne M
A1 Adema, Lotte E
A1 Romaguera, Dora
A1 Vergnaud, Anne-Claire
A1 Agudo, Antonio
A1 Ekelund, Ulf
A1 Steffen, Annika
A1 Orfanos, Philippos
A1 Slimani, Nadia
A1 Rinaldi, Sabina
A1 Mouw, Traci
A1 Rohrmann, Sabine
A1 Hermann, Silke
A1 Boeing, Heiner
A1 Bergmann, Manuela M
A1 Jakobsen, Marianne Uhre
A1 Overvad, Kim
A1 Wareham, Nicholas J
A1 Gonzalez, Carlos
A1 Tjonneland, Anne
A1 Halkjaer, Jytte
A1 Key, Timothy J
A1 Spencer, Elizabeth A
A1 Hellstrom, Veronica
A1 Manjer, Jonas
A1 Hedblad, Bo
A1 Lund, Eiliv
A1 Braaten, Tonje
A1 Clavel-Chapelon, Françoise
A1 Boutron-Ruault, Marie-Christine
A1 Rodríguez, Laudina
A1 Sanchez-Perez, Maria-Jose
A1 Dorronsoro, Miren
A1 Barricarte, Aurelio
A1 Huerta, Jose Maria
A1 Naska, Androniki
A1 Trichopoulou, Antonia
A1 Palli, Domenico
A1 Pala, Valeria
A1 Norat, Teresa
A1 Mattiello, Amalia
A1 Tumino, Rosario
A1 van der A, Daphne
A1 Bueno-de-Mesquita, H Bas
A1 Riboli, Elio
A1 Peeters, Petra H M
K1 Non-response
K1 Non-participation
K1 Lost-to-follow-up
K1 Follow-up
K1 Health survey
K1 Nonresponse bias
K1 Selection bias
K1 Population
K1 cohort
K1 Attrition
K1 representativeness
K1 Participation
K1 Predictors
K1 Encuestas epidemiológicas
K1 Estilo de Vida
AB BACKGROUNDThis paper discusses whether baseline demographic, socio-economic, health variables, length of follow-up and method of contacting the participants predict non-response to the invitation for a second assessment of lifestyle factors and body weight in the European multi-center EPIC-PANACEA study.METHODSOver 500.000 participants from several centers in ten European countries recruited between 1992 and 2000 were contacted 2-11 years later to update data on lifestyle and body weight. Length of follow-up as well as the method of approaching differed between the collaborating study centers. Non-responders were compared with responders using multivariate logistic regression analyses.RESULTSOverall response for the second assessment was high (81.6%). Compared to postal surveys, centers where the participants completed the questionnaire by phone attained a higher response. Response was also high in centers with a short follow-up period. Non-response was higher in participants who were male (odds ratio 1.09 (confidence interval 1.07; 1.11), aged under 40 years (1.96 (1.90; 2.02), living alone (1.40 (1.37; 1.43), less educated (1.35 (1.12; 1.19), of poorer health (1.33 (1.27; 1.39), reporting an unhealthy lifestyle and who had either a low (<18.5 kg/m2, 1.16 (1.09; 1.23)) or a high BMI (>25, 1.08 (1.06; 1.10); especially ≥30 kg/m2, 1.26 (1.23; 1.29)).CONCLUSIONSCohort studies may enhance cohort maintenance by paying particular attention to the subgroups that are most unlikely to respond and by an active recruitment strategy using telephone interviews.
PB BioMed Central
YR 2012
FD 2012-09-24
LK http://hdl.handle.net/10668/777
UL http://hdl.handle.net/10668/777
LA en
NO May AM, Adema LE, Romaguera D, Vergnaud AC, Agudo A, Ekelund U, et al. Determinants of non- response to a second assessment of lifestyle factors and body weight in the EPIC-PANACEA study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012; 12:148
NO PubMed - in process
DS RISalud
RD Apr 6, 2025