Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15131086

Reducing attrition in panel studies in developing countries.

Zelee Hill
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Panel studies offer repeated observations of individuals over time, but the mobility of populations in the developing world often causes attrition in panel studies. Such attrition can cause bias if it is selective but can be reduced by tracking respondents. Tracking in developing countries can be costly and difficult as populations are often highly mobile, infrastructure is poor, structures frequently change, and formal address systems or population records rarely exist. Method In this paper, the attrition and tracking experiences of panel studies in developing countries are reviewed and recommendations made for ensuring effective tracking. Comments Tracking can reduce attrition by up to 45% and is feasible if procedures are locally appropriate, well planned, involve the community, collect as much locating data as possible, and have explicit criteria, and if tracking is done at regular intervals, and interviewers are well trained, supervised, and motivated. CONCLUSION: Attrition is an important issue in panel studies, whilst tracking can be costly it can reduce attrition if effective procedures are used.

Explore related subjects

BiasData CollectionDeveloping CountriesEpidemiologic Research DesignHumansInterviews as TopicLongitudinal StudiesPatient DropoutsPopulation DynamicsPopulation SurveillanceJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zelee Hill. 2004-05-06. Reducing attrition in panel studies in developing countries.. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije%2Fdyh060

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Assessment of blinding in pharmacotherapy and noninvasive neuromodulation randomized controlled trials for neuropathic pain in adults.

In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), study participants and research personnel are often blinded to minimize biases related to knowing treatment allocation. To determine if blinding was effective, participants may be asked which treatment they believe they received ("treatment guess"). This descriptive review characterized blinding assessment (BA) reporting in pharmacotherapy and neuromodulation neuropathic pain RCTs. Of 288 papers, 36 (12.5%) reported a BA. One paper reported the results of 2 studies, so in total 37 studies with a BA were assessed. Of these, 19 were crossover, 17 parallel, and 1 partial crossover in design. All 37 studies assessed participant blinding, and 10 also assessed investigator blinding. Approximately 27% included an "unsure" answer option for treatment guess, and 38% asked the reason for the guess. There were no clear patterns in BA reporting across time nor based on treatment type. Seventeen trials provided sufficient data to calculate Bang Blinding Index (BI) to determine blinding success. Participants remained blinded (BI = 0 &#xb1; 0.2) in 10/17 placebo and 10/17 treatment arms, 6 placebo and 5 treatment arms had a BI > 0.2 suggesting possible unblinding, whereas 1 placebo and 2 treatment arms had a BI < -0.2 suggesting misinformed guessing. Overall, we found that BAs are done in a minority of published neuropathic pain trials and with variable methodology. Given the importance of minimizing risk of bias because of treatment unblinding, future studies should consider including BAs, and further consensus building is necessary to determine if and how BAs should be conducted and interpreted in analgesic clinical trials.

Bias↗
PubMed2007

A residuals-based transition model for longitudinal analysis with estimation in the presence of missing data.

We propose a transition model for analysing data from complex longitudinal studies. Because missing values are practically unavoidable in large longitudinal studies, we also present a two-stage imputation method for handling general patterns of missing values on both the outcome and the covariates by combining multiple imputation with stochastic regression imputation. Our model is a time-varying auto-regression on the past innovations (residuals), and it can be used in cases where general dynamics must be taken into account, and where the model selection is important. The entire estimation process was carried out using available procedures in statistical packages such as SAS and S-PLUS. To illustrate the viability of the proposed model and the two-stage imputation method, we analyse data collected in an epidemiological study that focused on various factors relating to childhood growth. Finally, we present a simulation study to investigate the behaviour of our two-stage imputation procedure.

Bias↗