Title: Determinants of non- response to a second assessment of lifestyle factors and body weight in the EPIC-PANACEA study
Authors: May, Anne M
Adema, Lotte E
Romaguera, Dora
Vergnaud, Anne-Claire
Agudo, Antonio
Ekelund, Ulf
Steffen, Annika
Orfanos, Philippos
Slimani, Nadia
Rinaldi, Sabina
Mouw, Traci
Rohrmann, Sabine
Hermann, Silke
Boeing, Heiner
Bergmann, Manuela M
Jakobsen, Marianne U
Overvad, Kim
Wareham, Nicholas J
Gonzalez, Carlos
Tjonneland, Anne
Halkjaer, Jytte
Key, Timothy J
Spencer, Elizabeth A
Hellstrom, Veronica
Manjer, Jonas
Hedblad, Bo
Lund, Eiliv
Braaten, Tonje
Clavel-Chapelon, Françoise
Boutron-Ruault, Marie-Christine
Rodríguez, Laudina
Sánchez, Maria J
Dorronsoro, Miren
Barricarte, Aurelio
Huerta, Jose M
Naska, Androniki
Trichopoulou, Antonia
Palli, Domenico
Pala, Valeria
Norat, Teresa
Mattiello, Amalia
Tumino, Rosario
van der A, Daphne
Bueno-de-Mesquita, H B
Riboli, Elio
Peeters, Petra H M
Issue Date: 24-Sep-2012
Abstract: Abstract Background This 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. Methods Over 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. Results Overall 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)). Conclusions Cohort 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.
URI: http://www.dspace.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/243987
Other Identifiers: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-12-148
Appears in Collections:BioMed Storage Collection

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
1471-2288-12-148.xml101.47 kBXMLView/Open
1471-2288-12-148.pdf372.38 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Additional resources for this item
retrieve citation metadata in EndNote format

This item has been accessed 329 times.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.