Dataset Information

Alternative Approaches to Assessing Nonresponse Bias in Longitudinal Survey Estimates: An Application to Substance-Use Outcomes Among Young Adults in the United States.

ABSTRACT: We evaluated alternative approaches to assessing and correcting for nonresponse bias in a longitudinal survey. We considered the changes in substance-use outcomes over a 3-year period among young adults aged 18-24 years (n = 5,199) in the United States, analyzing data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. This survey collected a variety of substance-use information from a nationally representative sample of US adults in 2 waves: 2001-2002 and 2004-2005. We first considered nonresponse rates in the second wave as a function of key substance-use outcomes in wave 1. We then evaluated 5 alternative approaches designed to correct for nonresponse bias under different attrition mechanisms, including weighting adjustments, multiple imputation, selection models, and pattern-mixture models. Nonignorable attrition in a longitudinal survey can lead to bias in estimates of change in certain health behaviors over time, and only selected procedures enable analysts to assess the sensitivity of their inferences to different assumptions about the extent of nonignorability. We compared estimates based on these 5 approaches, and we suggest a road map for assessing the risk of nonresponse bias in longitudinal studies. We conclude with directions for future research in this area given the results of our evaluations.

SUBMITTER: West BT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5860399 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Alternative Approaches to Assessing Nonresponse Bias in Longitudinal Survey Estimates: An Application to Substance-Use Outcomes Among Young Adults in the United States.

West Brady Thomas BT McCabe Sean Esteban SE

American journal of epidemiology 20170401 7

We evaluated alternative approaches to assessing and correcting for nonresponse bias in a longitudinal survey. We considered the changes in substance-use outcomes over a 3-year period among young adults aged 18-24 years (n = 5,199) in the United States, analyzing data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. This survey collected a variety of substance-use information from a nationally representative sample of US adults in 2 waves: 2001-2002 and 2004-2005. We fir ...[more]

PMID: 28338839

Similar Datasets

Project description:Joint encounter (JE) models estimate demographic rates using live recapture and dead recovery data. The extent to which limited recapture or recovery data can hinder estimation in JE models is not completely understood. Yet limited data are common in ecological research. We designed a series of simulations using Bayesian multistate JE models that spanned a large range of potential recapture probabilities (0.01-0.90) and two reported mortality probabilities (0.10, 0.19). We calculated bias by comparing estimates against known probabilities of survival, fidelity and reported mortality. We explored whether sparse data (i.e., recapture probabilities <0.02) compromised inference about survival by comparing estimates from dead recovery (DR) and JE models using an 18-year data set from a migratory bird, the lesser snow goose (Anser caerulescens caerulescens). Our simulations showed that bias in probabilities of survival, fidelity and reported mortality was relatively low across a large range of recapture probabilities, except when recapture and reported mortality probabilities were both lowest. While bias in fidelity probability was similar across all recapture probabilities, the root mean square error declined substantially with increased recapture probabilities for reported mortality probabilities of 0.10 or 0.19, as expected. In our case study, annual survival probabilities for adult female snow geese were similar whether estimated with JE or DR models, but more precise from JE models than those from DR models. Thus, our simulated and empirical data suggest acceptably minimal bias in survival, fidelity or reported mortality probabilities estimated from JE models. Even a small amount of recapture information provided adequate structure for JE models, except when reported mortality probabilities were <0.10. Thus, practitioners with limited recapture data should not be discouraged from use of JE models. We recommend that ecologists incorporate other data types as frequently as analytically possible, since precision of focal parameters is improved, and additional parameters of interest can be estimated.

Project description:BackgroundAn increasingly popular measure for summarising cancer prognosis is the loss in life expectancy (LLE), i.e. the reduction in life expectancy following a cancer diagnosis. The proportion of life lost (PLL) can also be derived, improving comparability across age groups as LLE is highly age-dependent. LLE and PLL are often used to assess the impact of cancer over the remaining lifespan and across groups (e.g. socioeconomic groups). However, in the presence of screening, it is unclear whether part of the differences across population groups could be attributed to lead time bias. Lead time is the extra time added due to early diagnosis, that is, the time from tumour detection through screening to the time that cancer would have been diagnosed symptomatically. It leads to artificially inflated survival estimates even when there are no real survival improvements.MethodsIn this paper, we used a simulation-based approach to assess the impact of lead time due to mammography screening on the estimation of LLE and PLL in breast cancer patients. A natural history model developed in a Swedish setting was used to simulate the growth of breast cancer tumours and age at symptomatic detection. Then, a screening programme similar to current guidelines in Sweden was imposed, with individuals aged 40-74 invited to participate every second year; different scenarios were considered for screening sensitivity and attendance. To isolate the lead time bias of screening, we assumed that screening does not affect the actual time of death. Finally, estimates of LLE and PLL were obtained in the absence and presence of screening, and their difference was used to derive the lead time bias.ResultsThe largest absolute bias for LLE was 0.61 years for a high screening sensitivity scenario and assuming perfect screening attendance. The absolute bias was reduced to 0.46 years when the perfect attendance assumption was relaxed to allow for imperfect attendance across screening visits. Bias was also present for the PLL estimates.ConclusionsThe results of the analysis suggested that lead time bias influences LLE and PLL metrics, thus requiring special consideration when interpreting comparisons across calendar time or population groups.

Dataset Information

Alternative Approaches to Assessing Nonresponse Bias in Longitudinal Survey Estimates: An Application to Substance-Use Outcomes Among Young Adults in the United States.

Publications

Alternative Approaches to Assessing Nonresponse Bias in Longitudinal Survey Estimates: An Application to Substance-Use Outcomes Among Young Adults in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets