Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34092226›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2021

Strategies for assessing the impact of loss to follow-up on estimates of neurodevelopmental impairment in a very preterm cohort at 2 years of age.

Aurélie Piedvache, Stef van Buuren, Henrique Barros, Ana Isabel Ribeiro, Elizabeth Draper, Jennifer Zeitlin, EPICE Research group

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Aurélie PiedvacheCRESS, Obstetrical Perinatal and Pediatric Epidemiology Research Team, EPOPé, INSERM, INRA, Université de Paris, F-75004, Paris, France.
Stef van BuurenDepartment of Methodology & Statistics, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Henrique BarrosEPI Unit-Instituto de Saúde Pública da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Ana Isabel RibeiroEPI Unit-Instituto de Saúde Pública da Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Elizabeth DraperUniversity of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Jennifer ZeitlinCRESS, Obstetrical Perinatal and Pediatric Epidemiology Research Team, EPOPé, INSERM, INRA, Université de Paris, F-75004, Paris, France. jennifer.zeitlin@inserm.fr.
EPICE Research group
University of Leicester · GBInserm · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FRi3S - Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto · PTNetherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research · NLSorbonne Paris Cité · FRCentre de Recherche Épidémiologie et Statistique

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLoss to follow-up is a major challenge for very preterm (VPT) cohorts; attrition is associated with social disadvantage and parents with impaired children may participate less in research. We investigated the impact of loss to follow-up on the estimated prevalence of neurodevelopmental impairment in a VPT cohort using different methodological approaches.

methodsThis study includes births < 32 weeks of gestational age (GA) from 4 regions in the UK and Portugal participating in a European birth cohort (N = 1737 survivors). Data on maternal characteristics, pregnancy complications, neonatal outcomes and neighborhood deprivation were collected at baseline. Neurodevelopment was assessed at 2 years of corrected age (CA) using standardized parent-report measures. We applied (1) multiple imputation (MI) and (2) inverse probability weighting (IPW) to estimate the impact of non-response on the prevalence of moderate to severe neurodevelopmental impairment and assessed violations of the missing at random (MAR) assumption using the delta method.

results54.2% of children were followed-up. Follow-up was less likely when mothers were younger, multiparous, foreign-born, did not breastfeed and came from deprived areas. The prevalence of neurodevelopmental impairment was 18.4% (95% confidence interval (CI):15.9-21.1) and increased to 20.4% (95%CI: 17.3-23.4) and 20.0% (95%CI:16.9-23.1) for MI and IPW models, respectively. Simulating strong violations of MAR (children with impairments being 50% less likely to be followed-up) raised estimates to 23.6 (95%CI:20.1-27.1)

conclusionsIn a VPT cohort with high loss to follow-up, correcting for attrition yielded modest increased estimates of neurodevelopmental impairment at 2 years CA; estimates were relatively robust to violations of the MAR assumption.

Indexed as

Infant, Extremely PrematureChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGestational AgeHumansInfant, NewbornPortugalPregnancyDelta methodInverse probability weightingLoss to follow-upMultiple imputationNeurodevelopmentPreterm births

Identifiers

PMID34092226
PMCPMC8182922
OpenAlexW3168481398

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.