When does attrition lead to biased estimates of alcohol consumption? Bias analysis for loss to follow-up in 30 longitudinal cohorts

样本流失何时会导致酒精消费量估计出现偏差?30个纵向队列研究中失访造成的偏差分析

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Survey nonresponse has increased across decades, making the amount of attrition a focus in generating inferences from longitudinal data. Use of inverse probability weights [IPWs] and other statistical approaches are common, but residual bias remains a threat. Quantitative bias analysis for nonrandom attrition as an adjunct to IPW may yield more robust inference. METHODS: Data were drawn from the Monitoring the Future panel studies [twelfth grade, base-year: 1976-2005; age 29/30 follow-up: 1987-2017, N = 73,298]. We then applied IPW imputation in increasing percentages, assuming varying risk differences [RDs] among nonresponders. Measurements included past-two-week binge drinking at base-year and every follow-up. Demographic and other correlates of binge drinking contributed to IPW estimation. RESULTS: Attrition increased: 31.14%, base-year 1976; 61.33%, base-year 2005. The magnitude of bias depended not on attrition rate but on prevalence of binge drinking and RD among nonrespondents. The probable range of binge drinking among nonresponders was 12-45%. In every scenario, base-year and follow-up binge drinking were associated. The likely range of true RDs was 0.14 [95% CI: 0.11-0.17] to 0.28 [95% CI: 0.25-0.31]. CONCLUSIONS: When attrition is present, the amount of attrition alone is insufficient to understand contribution to effect estimates. We recommend including bias analysis in longitudinal analyses.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。