ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2024
Evaluating bias with loss to follow-up in a community-based cohort: empirical investigation from the CARRS Study.
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The association of overweight, obesity, and long-term obesity with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a meta-analysis of 9 population-based cohorts from the Netherlands Cohorts Consortium.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2025Pooled it
- Subtypes of Type 2 Diabetes and Prediabetes: Mortality and Excess Life Lost in South Asians.Diabetes care · 2026Article
- Age at type 2 diabetes diagnosis, mortality, and health loss in South Asians.Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2026Article
- Digital clock assessment in South Asian setting: pilot study.NPJ dementia · 2026Article
- Lessons from a long cohort study of diabetes in South Asia.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Digital Clock Assessment in South Asian Setting: Pilot study.Research square · 2025Article
- Association of age at menarche with type 2 diabetes mellitus among urban Indian women: results from the CARRS study.International journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRetention of participants is a challenge in community-based longitudinal cohort studies. We aim to evaluate the factors associated with loss to follow-up and estimate attrition bias.
methodsData are from an ongoing cohort study, Center for cArdiometabolic Risk Reduction in South Asia (CARRS) in India (Delhi and Chennai). Multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to identify sociodemographic factors associated with partial (at least one follow-up) or no follow-up (loss to follow-up). We also examined the impact of participant attrition on the magnitude of observed associations using relative ORs (RORs) of hypertension and diabetes (prevalent cases) with baseline sociodemographic factors.
resultsThere were 12 270 CARRS cohort members enrolled in Chennai and Delhi at baseline in 2010, and subsequently six follow-ups were conducted between 2011 and 2022. The median follow-up time was 9.5 years (IQR: 9.3-9.8) and 1048 deaths occurred. Approximately 3.1% of participants had no follow-up after the baseline visit. Younger (relative risk ratio (RRR): 1.14; 1.04 to 1.24), unmarried participants (RRR: 1.75; 1.45 to 2.11) and those with low household assets (RRR: 1.63; 1.44 to 1.85) had higher odds of being lost to follow-up. The RORs of sociodemographic factors with diabetes and hypertension did not statistically differ between baseline and sixth follow-up, suggesting minimal potential for bias in inference at follow-up.
conclusionIn this representative cohort of urban Indians, we found low attrition and minimal bias due to the loss to follow-up. Our cohort's inconsistent participation bias shows our retention strategies like open communication, providing health profiles, etc have potential benefits.
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.