ArticleBirth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology2015
What we don't know can hurt us: Nonresponse bias assessment in birth defects research.
Article in Birth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- State-specific prevalence of current e-cigarette use by disability status and disability type-United States, BRFSS 2016-2018.Disability and health journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNonresponse bias assessment is an important and underutilized tool in survey research to assess potential bias due to incomplete participation. This study illustrates a nonresponse bias sensitivity assessment using a survey on perceived barriers to care for children with orofacial clefts in North Carolina.
methodsChildren born in North Carolina between 2001 and 2004 with an orofacial cleft were eligible for inclusion. Vital statistics data, including maternal and child characteristics, were available on all eligible subjects. Missing 'responses' from nonparticipants were imputed using assumptions based on the distribution of responses, survey method (mail or phone), and participant maternal demographics.
resultsOverall, 245 of 475 subjects (51.6%) responded to either a mail or phone survey. Cost as a barrier to care was reported by 25.0% of participants. When stratified by survey type, 28.3% of mail respondents and 17.2% of phone respondents reported cost as a barrier. Under various assumptions, the bias-adjusted estimated prevalence of cost as barrier to care ranged from 16.1% to 30.0%. Maternal age, education, race, and marital status at time of birth were not associated with subjects reporting cost as a barrier.
conclusionAs survey response rates continue to decline, the importance of assessing the potential impact of nonresponse bias has become more critical. Birth defects research is particularly conducive to nonresponse bias analysis, especially when birth defect registries and birth certificate records are used. Future birth defect studies which use population-based surveillance data and have incomplete participation could benefit from this type of nonresponse bias assessment. Birth Defects Research (Part A) 103:603-609, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.