American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 154, No. 6 : 574-581
Copyright © 2001 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health
PRACTICE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Reported Participation in Case-Control Studies: Changes over Time
From Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Box 44, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021 (e-mail: olsons{at}mskcc.org).
There is concern that participation in case-control studies has declined. To address this question, the author and colleagues reviewed data from 82 US and Canadian case-control studies published in epidemiologic journals during two periods: 1988–1990 and 1997–January 1999. The median year of data collection, which ranged from 1972 to 1996, was the primary independent variable. Reported response among both cases and controls remained constant over this time period. The regression coefficients (ß) were small: For each year, there was a change of 0.15 percentage points for cases (p = 0.56) and –0.16 percentage points for controls (p = 0.54). Possible confounders included the location where the study had been conducted and, for cases, the disease under study (cancer vs. others). After adjustment for these factors in case groups, there was still no association between year of data collection and response: For each year, there was a change of –0.20 percentage points (p = 0.43). After adjustment of results for study location among controls, there was a moderate decline over time: For each year, there was a change of –0.44 percentage points (p = 0.12). Overall, reported response in more recent studies was similar to that in earlier studies; for control groups, this may reflect changes in locations where the studies were conducted.
case-control studies; data collection; epidemiologic methods
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. P. Vandenbroucke, E. v. Elm, D. G. Altman, P. C. Gotzsche, C. D. Mulrow, S. J. Pocock, C. Poole, J. J. Schlesselman, M. Egger, and for the STROBE initiative Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and Elaboration Ann Intern Med, October 16, 2007; 147(8): W-163 - W-194. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Yoshida, S. Kono, M. A Moore, K. Toyomura, J. Nagano, T. Mizoue, R. Mibu, M. Tanaka, Y. Kakeji, Y. Maehara, et al. Colorectal Polypectomy and Risk of Colorectal Cancer by Subsite: The Fukuoka Colorectal Cancer Study Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., August 23, 2007; (2007) hym065v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. R. Bunin, L. G. Spector, A. F. Olshan, L. L. Robison, M. Roesler, S. Grufferman, X.-o. Shu, and J. A. Ross Secular Trends in Response Rates for Controls Selected by Random Digit Dialing in Childhood Cancer Studies: A Report from the Children's Oncology Group Am. J. Epidemiol., July 1, 2007; 166(1): 109 - 116. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. M. Morton, J. Cahill, and P. Hartge Reporting Participation in Epidemiologic Studies: A Survey of Practice Am. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2006; 163(3): 197 - 203. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Macarthur, L. Sharp, G. L. Hold, J. Little, and E. M. El-Omar The Role of Cytokine Gene Polymorphisms in Colorectal Cancer and Their Interaction with Aspirin Use in the Northeast of Scotland Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2005; 14(7): 1613 - 1618. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Rogers, M. A. Murtaugh, S. Edwards, and M. L. Slattery Contacting Controls: Are We Working Harder for Similar Response Rates, and Does It Make a Difference? Am. J. Epidemiol., July 1, 2004; 160(1): 85 - 90. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Ross, L. G. Spector, A. F. Olshan, and G. R. Bunin Invited Commentary: Birth Certificates--A Best Control Scenario? Am. J. Epidemiol., May 15, 2004; 159(10): 922 - 924. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|