Cargando…

Estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries

BACKGROUND: Loss to follow-up, if related to exposures, confounders and outcomes of interest, may bias association estimates. We estimated the magnitude and direction of such bias in a prospective cohort study of crash injury among cyclists. METHODS: The Taupo Bicycle Study involved 2590 adult cycli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tin Tin, Sandar, Woodward, Alistair, Ameratunga, Shanthi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174123/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24336816
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2013-040997
_version_ 1782336306556174336
author Tin Tin, Sandar
Woodward, Alistair
Ameratunga, Shanthi
author_facet Tin Tin, Sandar
Woodward, Alistair
Ameratunga, Shanthi
author_sort Tin Tin, Sandar
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Loss to follow-up, if related to exposures, confounders and outcomes of interest, may bias association estimates. We estimated the magnitude and direction of such bias in a prospective cohort study of crash injury among cyclists. METHODS: The Taupo Bicycle Study involved 2590 adult cyclists recruited from New Zealand's largest cycling event in 2006 and followed over a median period of 4.6 years through linkage to four administrative databases. We resurveyed the participants in 2009 and excluded three participants who died prior to the resurvey. We compared baseline characteristics and crash outcomes of the baseline (2006) and follow-up (those who responded in 2009) cohorts by ratios of relative frequencies and estimated potential bias from loss to follow-up on seven exposure-outcome associations of interest by ratios of HRs. RESULTS: Of the 2587 cyclists in the baseline cohort, 1526 (60%) responded to the follow-up survey. The responders were older, more educated and more socioeconomically advantaged. They were more experienced cyclists who often rode in a bunch, off-road or in the dark, but were less likely to engage in other risky cycling behaviours. Additionally, they experienced bicycle crashes more frequently during follow-up. The selection bias ranged between −10% and +9% for selected associations. CONCLUSIONS: Loss to follow-up was differential by demographic, cycling and behavioural risk characteristics as well as crash outcomes, but did not substantially bias association estimates of primary research interest.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4174123
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41741232014-10-02 Estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries Tin Tin, Sandar Woodward, Alistair Ameratunga, Shanthi Inj Prev Original Article BACKGROUND: Loss to follow-up, if related to exposures, confounders and outcomes of interest, may bias association estimates. We estimated the magnitude and direction of such bias in a prospective cohort study of crash injury among cyclists. METHODS: The Taupo Bicycle Study involved 2590 adult cyclists recruited from New Zealand's largest cycling event in 2006 and followed over a median period of 4.6 years through linkage to four administrative databases. We resurveyed the participants in 2009 and excluded three participants who died prior to the resurvey. We compared baseline characteristics and crash outcomes of the baseline (2006) and follow-up (those who responded in 2009) cohorts by ratios of relative frequencies and estimated potential bias from loss to follow-up on seven exposure-outcome associations of interest by ratios of HRs. RESULTS: Of the 2587 cyclists in the baseline cohort, 1526 (60%) responded to the follow-up survey. The responders were older, more educated and more socioeconomically advantaged. They were more experienced cyclists who often rode in a bunch, off-road or in the dark, but were less likely to engage in other risky cycling behaviours. Additionally, they experienced bicycle crashes more frequently during follow-up. The selection bias ranged between −10% and +9% for selected associations. CONCLUSIONS: Loss to follow-up was differential by demographic, cycling and behavioural risk characteristics as well as crash outcomes, but did not substantially bias association estimates of primary research interest. BMJ Publishing Group 2014-10 2013-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4174123/ /pubmed/24336816 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2013-040997 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
spellingShingle Original Article
Tin Tin, Sandar
Woodward, Alistair
Ameratunga, Shanthi
Estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries
title Estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries
title_full Estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries
title_fullStr Estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries
title_full_unstemmed Estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries
title_short Estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries
title_sort estimating bias from loss to follow-up in a prospective cohort study of bicycle crash injuries
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4174123/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24336816
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2013-040997
work_keys_str_mv AT tintinsandar estimatingbiasfromlosstofollowupinaprospectivecohortstudyofbicyclecrashinjuries
AT woodwardalistair estimatingbiasfromlosstofollowupinaprospectivecohortstudyofbicyclecrashinjuries
AT ameratungashanthi estimatingbiasfromlosstofollowupinaprospectivecohortstudyofbicyclecrashinjuries