Cited by 29Statistical Methods in EpidemiologyGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse

Non‐response bias as a likely cause of the association between young maternal age at the time of delivery and the risk of cancer in the offspring

Schüz, Joachim·2003·Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology

Abstract

Summary: Some epidemiological studies have shown an association between young maternal age at the time of delivery and risk of cancer in the offspring. In a recent German case–control study, there was a twofold increase in the leukaemia risk for children whose mothers were aged < 20 years at the time of delivery. As the prevalence of younger mothers among control families was particularly low, data on maternal age distributions for the general population of Germany were obtained in order to examine the representativeness of the control sample. Despite the excellent sampling frame based on data from complete and up‐to‐date population registries and a satisfactory response rate among controls (≈71%), there seemed to be a material deficit of young mothers in the control sample. The prevalence of young mothers in the control group was 1.4%[95% CI 0.8%, 2.0%] compared with 2.9% in the general population and 3.3%[1.8%, 4.8%] among leukaemia cases. The most likely cause of this deficit was non‐participation. Non‐participation bias is hard to identify if no information is available on non‐responders and if it results from only small subgroups among the total control sample. Maternal age and childhood leukaemia are an example where differential non‐participation creates a spurious moderate association for a relatively rare exposure situation. But nowadays, many epidemiological studies target the detection of small to moderate risk increases for rare exposures. Therefore, the choice of a representative control group as well as the achievement of an excellent response rate are of prime importance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-3016.2003.00460.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schüz, J.
Affiliations
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
Corresponding author
Schüz, Joachim
Venue
Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
106-112
ISSN
  • 0269-5022 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-3016
OpenAlex
W2146358960
Cited by
29
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2
FWCI
1.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Keywords
nonresponse bias, young maternal age, pediatric leukemia, case-control study, response rate, exposure misclassification, maternal age
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin, Maternal Age, Neuroblastoma, Risk, Bias, Case-Control Studies, Central Nervous System Neoplasms, Sample Size, Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review