» Articles » PMID: 16364384

Non-response in a Survey of Cardiovascular Risk Factors in the Dutch Population: Determinants and Resulting Biases

Overview
Journal Public Health
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Public Health
Date 2005 Dec 21
PMID 16364384
Citations 55
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The aim of the research was to study the determinants of participation in a health examination survey (HES) which was carried out in a population that previously participated in a health interview survey (HIS) of Statistics Netherlands, and to estimate the effect of non-participation on both the prevalence of the main HES outcomes (risk factors for cardiovascular disease) and on relationships between variables.

Methods: Logistic regression was used to study the determinants of participation in the HES (n=3699) by those who had previously participated in the HIS (n=12,786). Linear models were used to predict the main outcomes in non-participants of the HES. Item non-response was handled by multiple imputation.

Results: HES participants had a higher socio-economic status and comprised more 'worried well', while the rural population were less likely to participate in the HES. Most predicted values of outcomes in HES non-participants differed from those in HES participants, but much of this was due to differences in the age and gender composition of both groups. Taking age and gender differences into account, most predicted values of outcomes in the entire HIS population were within the 95% confidence intervals of the HES values, with the exception of body height in men and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, fasting glucose and body weight in women. These differences are most likely to be due to the higher socio-economic status of HES participants. Relationships between HIS variables did not change significantly when using HES participants alone compared with all HIS participants.

Conclusions: Despite a high rate of non-participation, some bias, mostly small, was seen in the prevalence rates of the main outcome variables. Bias in the relationships between variables was negligible.

Citing Articles

Predictors of hearing screening among residents of Saudi Arabia at primary healthcare settings in Riyadh: useful insights from a cross-sectional survey.

Alshdoukhi I, Shubair M, El-Metwally A, Alhazzaa R, Fatani F, Alshehri A BMC Public Health. 2025; 25(1):756.

PMID: 39994626 PMC: 11854117. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-025-21769-6.


Health characteristics associated with persistence of SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses after repeated vaccinations in older persons over time: the Doetinchem cohort study.

Kuijpers Y, Kaczorowska J, Picavet H, de Zeeuw-Brouwer M, Kuijer M, Slits I Immun Ageing. 2024; 21(1):68.

PMID: 39407293 PMC: 11476400. DOI: 10.1186/s12979-024-00476-7.


Recruitment strategies and consent rates in a national prospective colorectal cancer screening cohort: results from year 1 of the Voyage Study.

Yost K, Carlson R, Kirt C, Kirsch E, Kneedler B, Laffin J BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2024; 11(1).

PMID: 39019622 PMC: 11288143. DOI: 10.1136/bmjgast-2024-001376.


Non-response bias in the analysis of the association between mental health and the urban environment: a cross-sectional study in Brussels, Belgium.

Guyot M, Pelgrims I, Aerts R, Keune H, Remmen R, De Clercq E Arch Public Health. 2023; 81(1):129.

PMID: 37420293 PMC: 10327324. DOI: 10.1186/s13690-023-01118-y.


Stepwise evaluation for the risk of metabolic unhealthiness and significant non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in India.

Mukherjee P, Ghosh S, Mukhopadhyay P, Das D, Sarkar P, Majumdar S Lancet Reg Health Southeast Asia. 2023; 12:100142.

PMID: 37384057 PMC: 10306046. DOI: 10.1016/j.lansea.2023.100142.