The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Loss to Follow-up in Cohort Studies: Bias in Estimates of Socioeconomic Inequalities
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Although cohort members tend to be healthy and affluent compared with the whole population, some studies indicate this does not bias certain exposure-outcome associations. It is less clear whether this holds when socioeconomic position (SEP) is the exposure of interest. METHODS: As an illustrative example, we use data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. We calculate estimates of maternal education inequalities in outcomes for which data are available on almost the whole cohort (birth weight and length, breastfeeding, preterm birth, maternal obesity, smoking during pregnancy, educational attainment). These are calculated for the full cohort (n~12,000) and in restricted subsamples defined by continued participation at age 10 years (n∼7,000) and age 15 years (n∼5,000). RESULTS: Loss to follow-up was related both to SEP and outcomes. For each outcome, loss to follow-up was associated with underestimation of inequality, which increased as participation rates decreased (eg, mean birth-weight difference between highest and lowest SEP was 116 g [95% confidence interval = 78 to 153] in the full sample and 93 g [45 to 141] and 62 g [5 to 119] in those attending at ages 10 and 15 years, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Considerable attrition from cohort studies may result in biased estimates of socioeconomic inequalities, and the degree of bias may worsen as participation rates decrease. However, even with considerable attrition (>50%), qualitative conclusions about the direction and approximate magnitude of inequalities did not change among most of our examples. The appropriate analysis approaches to alleviate bias depend on the missingness mechanism.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Inequality in the Early Cognitive Development of British Children in the 1970 Cohort
Feinstein, L. (2003) · Economica · doi:10.1111/1468-0335.t01-1-00272 · Cited by 620
Survey non-response in the Netherlands: Effects on prevalence estimates and associations
Van Loon, A. (2003) · Annals of Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/s1047-2797(02)00257-0 · Cited by 423
Measures of health inequalities: part 2: Table 1
Regidor, E. (2004) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.2004.023036 · Cited by 399
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 · doi:10.1093/aje/kwq257 · Cited by 322
Using causal diagrams to guide analysis in missing data problems
Daniel, R. M., Kenward, M. G., Cousens, S. N., & De Stavola, B. L. (2012) · Statistical Methods in Medical Research · doi:10.1177/0962280210394469 · Cited by 155
Cited by
Cohort Profile: The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children: ALSPAC mothers cohort
Fraser, A., Macdonald-Wallis, C., Tilling, K., Boyd, A., Golding, J., Davey Smith, G., Henderson, J., Macleod, J., Molloy, L., Ness, A., et al. (2013) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dys066 · Cited by 2,494
Self-citationCollider scope: when selection bias can substantially influence observed associations
Munafò, M. R., Tilling, K., Taylor, A. E., Evans, D. M., & Davey Smith, G. (2018) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyx206 · Cited by 813
Self-citationHow to investigate and adjust for selection bias in cohort studies
Nohr, E. A., & Liew, Z. (2018) · Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/aogs.13319 · Cited by 363
Taylor, A. E., Jones, H. J., Sallis, H., Euesden, J., Stergiakouli, E., Davies, N. M., Zammit, S., Lawlor, D. A., Munafò, M. R., Davey Smith, G., et al. (2018) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/dyy060 · Cited by 192
Self-citationHartman, C. A., Larsson, H., Vos, M., Bellato, A., Libutzki, B., Solberg, B. S., Chen, Q., Du Rietz, E., Mostert, J. C., Kittel-Schneider, S., et al. (2023) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105209 · Cited by 104
Metadata
- Authors
- Howe, L. D., Tilling, K., Galobardes, B., & Lawlor, D. A.
- Venue
- Epidemiology
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-9
- ISSN
- 1044-3983 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1994791246
- Cited by
- 315
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 14.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Loss to Follow-up in Cohort Studies: Bias in Estimates of Socioeconomic Inequalities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/ede.0b013e31827623b1
- The paper
- Howe, L. D., Tilling, K., Galobardes, B., & Lawlor, D. A. (2013). Loss to Follow-up in Cohort Studies: Bias in Estimates of Socioeconomic Inequalities. Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1097/ede.0b013e31827623b1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.