Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20527010›Full record

ArticleStatistics in medicine2010

Statistical and practical issues in the design of a national probability sample of births for the Vanguard Study of the National Children's Study.

Jill M Montaquila, J Michael Brick, Lester R Curtin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Statistics in medicine, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Maternal perspectives on the return of genetic results: context matters.American journal of medical genetics. Part A · 2013
    Article
  16. Article
  17. The National Children's Study: an opportunity for medical toxicology.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2012
    Review
  18. Article
  19. National Children's Study: update in 2010.The Mount Sinai journal of medicine, New York
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jill M MontaquilaWestat, 1600 Research Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850, USA. jillmontaquila@westat.com
J Michael Brick
Lester R Curtin

Funding

NICHD NIH HHS HHSN275200503395CNICHD NIH HHS N01 HD053395NICHD NIH HHS N01-HD-5-3395
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The National Children's Study is a national household probability sample designed to identify 100,000 children at birth and follow the sampled children for 21 years. Data from the study will support examining numerous hypotheses concerning genetic and environmental effects on the health and development of children. The goals of the study present substantial challenges. For example, the need for preconception, prenatal, and postnatal data requires identifying women in the early stages of pregnancy, the collection of many types of data, and the retention of the children over time. In this paper, we give an overview of the sample design used in a pilot study called the Vanguard Study, and highlight the approaches used to address these challenges. We will also describe the rationale for the sampling choices made at each stage, the unique organizational structure of the NCS and issues we expect to face during implementation.

Indexed as

Child WelfareEnvironmental HealthEpidemiologic Research DesignChildCohort StudiesData CollectionFemaleHumansMaternal WelfarePilot ProjectsPostnatal CarePreconception CarePregnancyPrenatal CareSampling StudiesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID20527010
PMCPMC2894610

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.