2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2010.01.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Impact of Attrition in an 11-Year Prospective Longitudinal Study of Younger Women

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
104
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 118 publications
(107 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
3
104
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Analysis of the relatively high attrition between baseline and Survey Two (n 9688; conducted in 2000; women aged 22-27 years) has concluded that possible biases due to loss to follow-up do not limit significant longitudinal analysis of these data (28) In order to use the most recent child birth information, we restricted the sample to parous women who answered Surveys One and Six (n 5917). Our final sample included complete cases for all exposures (n 4777).…”
Section: Study Design and Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analysis of the relatively high attrition between baseline and Survey Two (n 9688; conducted in 2000; women aged 22-27 years) has concluded that possible biases due to loss to follow-up do not limit significant longitudinal analysis of these data (28) In order to use the most recent child birth information, we restricted the sample to parous women who answered Surveys One and Six (n 5917). Our final sample included complete cases for all exposures (n 4777).…”
Section: Study Design and Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the mid-age cohort, more women are employed while in the younger cohort, women in the workforce are under-represented (11) . Further, the attenuation since baseline had minimal impact on representativeness (12) . Full details of recruitment and the sample's representativeness have been published previously (10,11) .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the 1973-78 cohort, non-response may be due to the highly mobile nature of young women. However, prior research suggests no serious bias in results from longitudinal analyses between risk factors and health outcomes in this cohort [49]. Retention rates for the 1946-51 cohort was 83% at survey 6, and non-response mainly due to being unable to contact participants.…”
Section: Strengths and Limitations Of Studymentioning
confidence: 99%