Cargando…

Evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies

BACKGROUND: Traditional methodologies for identifying and recruiting controls in epidemiologic case-control studies, such as random digit dialing or neighborhood walk, suffer from declining response rates. Here, we revisit the feasibility and comparability of using alternative sources of controls, s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhong, Charlie, Cockburn, Myles, Cozen, Wendy, Voutsinas, Jenna, Lacey, James V., Luo, Jianning, Sullivan-Halley, Jane, Bernstein, Leslie, Wang, Sophia S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6252092/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27871006
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2016.10.007
_version_ 1783373208689311744
author Zhong, Charlie
Cockburn, Myles
Cozen, Wendy
Voutsinas, Jenna
Lacey, James V.
Luo, Jianning
Sullivan-Halley, Jane
Bernstein, Leslie
Wang, Sophia S.
author_facet Zhong, Charlie
Cockburn, Myles
Cozen, Wendy
Voutsinas, Jenna
Lacey, James V.
Luo, Jianning
Sullivan-Halley, Jane
Bernstein, Leslie
Wang, Sophia S.
author_sort Zhong, Charlie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Traditional methodologies for identifying and recruiting controls in epidemiologic case-control studies, such as random digit dialing or neighborhood walk, suffer from declining response rates. Here, we revisit the feasibility and comparability of using alternative sources of controls, specifically friend and family controls. METHODS: We recruited from a recently completed case-control study of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) among women in Los Angeles County where controls from the parent study were ascertained by neighborhood walk. We calculated participation rates and compared questionnaire responses between the friend/family controls and the original matched controls from the parent study. RESULTS: Of the 182 NHL case patients contacted,111 (61%) agreed to participate in our feasibility study. 70 (63%) provided contact information for potential friend and/or family member controls. We were able to successfully contact and recruit a friend/family member for 92% of the case patients. This represented 46 friend controls and 54 family controls. Family controls significantly differed from original matched controls by sex and household income. Other characteristics were similar between friend controls and the original study’s neighborhood controls. CONCLUSION: The apparent comparability of neighborhood controls to friend and family controls among respondents in this study suggests that these alternative methods of control identification can serve as a complementary source of eligible controls in epidemiologic case-control studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6252092
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62520922018-11-24 Evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies Zhong, Charlie Cockburn, Myles Cozen, Wendy Voutsinas, Jenna Lacey, James V. Luo, Jianning Sullivan-Halley, Jane Bernstein, Leslie Wang, Sophia S. Cancer Epidemiol Article BACKGROUND: Traditional methodologies for identifying and recruiting controls in epidemiologic case-control studies, such as random digit dialing or neighborhood walk, suffer from declining response rates. Here, we revisit the feasibility and comparability of using alternative sources of controls, specifically friend and family controls. METHODS: We recruited from a recently completed case-control study of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) among women in Los Angeles County where controls from the parent study were ascertained by neighborhood walk. We calculated participation rates and compared questionnaire responses between the friend/family controls and the original matched controls from the parent study. RESULTS: Of the 182 NHL case patients contacted,111 (61%) agreed to participate in our feasibility study. 70 (63%) provided contact information for potential friend and/or family member controls. We were able to successfully contact and recruit a friend/family member for 92% of the case patients. This represented 46 friend controls and 54 family controls. Family controls significantly differed from original matched controls by sex and household income. Other characteristics were similar between friend controls and the original study’s neighborhood controls. CONCLUSION: The apparent comparability of neighborhood controls to friend and family controls among respondents in this study suggests that these alternative methods of control identification can serve as a complementary source of eligible controls in epidemiologic case-control studies. 2016-11-18 2017-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6252092/ /pubmed/27871006 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2016.10.007 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Zhong, Charlie
Cockburn, Myles
Cozen, Wendy
Voutsinas, Jenna
Lacey, James V.
Luo, Jianning
Sullivan-Halley, Jane
Bernstein, Leslie
Wang, Sophia S.
Evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies
title Evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies
title_full Evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies
title_fullStr Evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies
title_short Evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies
title_sort evaluating the use of friend or family controls in epidemiologic case-control studies
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6252092/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27871006
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2016.10.007
work_keys_str_mv AT zhongcharlie evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies
AT cockburnmyles evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies
AT cozenwendy evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies
AT voutsinasjenna evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies
AT laceyjamesv evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies
AT luojianning evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies
AT sullivanhalleyjane evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies
AT bernsteinleslie evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies
AT wangsophias evaluatingtheuseoffriendorfamilycontrolsinepidemiologiccasecontrolstudies