Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39565535›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2024

How to mitigate selection bias in COVID-19 surveys: evidence from five national cohorts.

Martina K Narayanan, Brian Dodgeon, Michail Katsoulis, George B Ploubidis, Richard J Silverwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

5 authors.

Martina K NarayananCentre for Longitudinal Studies, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK. m.narayanan@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1897-6063
Brian DodgeonCentre for Longitudinal Studies, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7130-8761
Michail KatsoulisMRC Unit for Lifelong Health & Ageing, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1756-9530
George B PloubidisCentre for Longitudinal Studies, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8198-5790
Richard J SilverwoodCentre for Longitudinal Studies, UCL Social Research Institute, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2744-1194

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council 2022-25 (ES/W013142/1)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-response to surveys is a common problem; even more so during the COVID-19 pandemic with social distancing measures challenging data collection. As respondents often differ from non-respondents, this can introduce bias. The goal of the current study was to see if we can reduce bias and restore sample representativeness in a series of COVID-19 surveys embedded within five UK cohort studies by using the rich data available from previous waves of data collection. Three surveys were conducted during the pandemic across five UK cohorts: National Survey of Health and Development (NSHD, born 1946), 1958 National Child Development Study (NCDS), 1970 British Cohort Study (BCS70), Next Steps (born 1989-90) and Millennium Cohort Study (MCS, born 2000-02). Response rates in the COVID-19 surveys were lower compared to previous waves, especially in the younger cohorts. We identified bias due to systematic non-response in several variables, with more respondents in the most advantaged social class and among those with higher childhood cognitive ability. Making use of the rich data available pre-pandemic in these longitudinal studies, the application of non-response weights and multiple imputation was successful in reducing bias in parental social class and childhood cognitive ability, nearly eliminating it for the former. Surveys embedded within existing cohort studies offer a clear advantage over cross-sectional samples collected during the pandemic in terms of their ability to mitigate selection bias. This will enhance the quality and reliability of future research studying the medium and long-term effects of the pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19SARS-CoV-2AdolescentAdultChildCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsSelection BiasSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomCOVID-19Longitudinal dataMissing dataMultiple imputationNon-responseWeighting

Identifiers

PMID39565535
PMCPMC11646265

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.