Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26438235›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2015

Sample selection, recruitment and participation rates in health examination surveys in Europe--experience from seven national surveys.

Jennifer S Mindell, Simona Giampaoli, Antje Goesswald, Panagiotis Kamtsiuris, Charlotte Mann, Satu Männistö, Karen Morgan, Nicola J Shelton, W M Monique Verschuren, Hanna Tolonen and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 115 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
115citing papers in PubMed
13.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

115 citing papers in PubMed, 211 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

55 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 7 countries.

Jennifer S MindellResearch Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, UCL, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. j.mindell@ucl.ac.uk.
Simona GiampaoliIstituto Superiore di Sanità, Viale Regina Elena n. 299, Rome, Italy. simona.giampaoli@iss.it.
Antje GoesswaldDepartment 2 Epidemiology and Health Monitoring Division 25, Robert Koch Institute, Examination surveys and Cohort studies, General-Pape-Str. 62-66, Berlin, 12101, Germany. goesswalda@rki.de.
Panagiotis KamtsiurisDepartment 2 Epidemiology and Health Monitoring Division 25, Robert Koch Institute, Examination surveys and Cohort studies, General-Pape-Str. 62-66, Berlin, 12101, Germany. kamtsiurisp@rki.de.
Charlotte MannResearch Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, UCL, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. charlottemann@hotmail.com.
Satu MännistöDepartment of Health, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), P.O. Box 30, Helsinki, FI-00271, Finland. satu.mannisto@thl.fi.
Karen MorganDepartment of Psychology, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. kmorgan@rcsi.ie.
Nicola J SheltonResearch Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, UCL, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. n.shelton@ucl.ac.uk.
W M Monique VerschurenDepartment Chronic Diseases Determinants, Center for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, P.O. Box 1, Bilthoven, 3720 BA, The Netherlands. monique.verschuren@rivm.nl.
Hanna TolonenDepartment of Health, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), P.O. Box 30, Helsinki, FI-00271, Finland. hanna.tolonen@thl.fi.
HES Response Rate Group
Public Health England · GBRobert Koch Institute · DEFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIRoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IEIstituto Superiore di Sanità · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth examination surveys (HESs), carried out in Europe since the 1950's, provide valuable information about the general population's health for health monitoring, policy making, and research. Survey participation rates, important for representativeness, have been falling. International comparisons are hampered by differing exclusion criteria and definitions for non-response.

methodInformation was collected about seven national HESs in Europe conducted in 2007-2012. These surveys can be classified into household and individual-based surveys, depending on the sampling frames used. Participation rates of randomly selected adult samples were calculated for four survey modules using standardised definitions and compared by sex, age-group, geographical areas within countries, and over time, where possible.

resultsAll surveys covered residents not just citizens; three countries excluded those in institutions. In two surveys, physical examinations and blood sample collection were conducted at the participants' home; the others occurred at examination clinics. Recruitment processes varied considerably between surveys. Monetary incentives were used in four surveys. Initial participation rates aged 35-64 were 45% in the Netherlands (phase II), 54% in Germany (new and previous participants combined), 55% in Italy, and 65% in Finland. In Ireland, England and Scotland, household participation rates were 66%, 66% and 63% respectively. Participation rates were generally higher in women and increased with age. Almost all participants attending an examination centre agreed to all modules but surveys conducted in the participants' home had falling responses to each stage. Participation rates in most primate cities were substantially lower than the national average. Age-standardized response rates to blood pressure measurement among those aged 35-64 in Finland, Germany and England fell by 0.7-1.5 percentage points p.a. between 1998-2002 and 2010-2012. Longer trends in some countries show a more marked fall.

conclusionsThe coverage of the general population in these seven national HESs was good, based on the sampling frames used and the sample sizes. Pre-notification and reminders were used effectively in those with highest participation rates. Participation rates varied by age, sex, geographical area, and survey design. They have fallen in most countries; the Netherlands data shows that they can be maintained at higher levels but at much higher cost.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionAdultAge FactorsEuropeFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutrition SurveysPatient ComplianceSample SizeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26438235
PMCPMC4595185
OpenAlexW1897135521

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.