Cited by 324Survey Methodology and NonresponseStatistical Methods in EpidemiologyHealth disparities and outcomes

The Health Status of Nonparticipants in a Population-based Health Study: The Hordaland Health Study

Knudsen, A. K., Hotopf, M., Skogen, J. C., Overland, S., Mykletun, A.·2010·American Journal of Epidemiology

Abstract

The authors aimed to examine whether nonparticipation in a population-based health study was associated with poorer health status; to determine whether specific health problems were overrepresented among nonparticipants; and to explore potential consequences of participation bias on associations between exposures and outcomes. They used data from the Hordaland Health Study (HUSK), conducted in western Norway in 1997-1999. Of 29,400 persons invited, 63.1% participated in the study. Information from HUSK was linked with the Norwegian national registry of disability pensions (DPs), including information about DP diagnosis. The risk of DP receipt was almost twice as high among nonparticipants as participants (relative risk = 1.88, 95% confidence interval: 1.81, 1.95). The association was strongest for DPs received for mental disorders, with a 3-fold increased risk for nonparticipation. Substance abuse, psychotic disorders, and personality disorders were especially overrepresented among nonparticipants. The authors simulated the impact of nonparticipation on associations between exposures and outcomes by excluding HUSK participants with higher symptoms of common mental disorders (exposure) and examining the impact on DP (outcome). This selective exclusion modestly reduced associations between common mental disorders and DP. The authors conclude that nonparticipants have poorer health, but this is disorder-dependent. Participation bias is probably a greater threat to the validity of prevalence studies than to studies of associations between exposures and outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/aje/kwq257

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Knudsen, A. K., Hotopf, M., Skogen, J. C., Overland, S., & Mykletun, A.
Affiliations
University of Bergen (NO)
Corresponding author
Knudsen, A. K.
Venue
American Journal of Epidemiology
Published
2010-09-15
Volume
172
Issue
11
Pages
1306-1314
ISSN
  • 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-6256
OpenAlex
W2163894459
Cited by
322
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 27
FWCI
73.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0507-10088)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
non-participation, participation bias, Hordaland Health Study, disability pension, common mental disorders, substance abuse, psychosis, personality disorders, health status, prevalence studies, exposure-outcome association, research validity
MeSH terms
Adult, Mental Disorders, Community Participation, Diagnosis-Related Groups, Female, Health Status, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Musculoskeletal Diseases, Norway, Population Surveillance, Surveys and Questionnaires, Selection Bias, Prevalence, Sex Distribution, Insurance, Disability

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