Cited by 333Health disparities and outcomesHealth, Environment, Cognitive AgingSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse

Bioindicators in the MIDUS National Study: Protocol, Measures, Sample, and Comparative Context

Open access
Dienberg Love, Gayle, Seeman, Teresa E., Weinstein, Maxine, Ryff, Carol D.·2010·Journal of Aging and Health

Abstract

Objectives: Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) is a national study of health and aging among individuals aged 25 to 74 at baseline (1995-1996). Longitudinal survey assessments (2004-2005), were followed by biological assessments on a subsample (aged 35-85).To facilitate public use, we describe the protocol, measures, and sample. Method: Respondents traveled to clinics for a 2-day data-collection protocol that included fasting blood specimens, 12-hr urine specimen, medical history, physical exam, bone densitometry, and a laboratory challenge (heart rate variability, blood pressure, respiration, salivary cortisol). Results: Response rates for the biological protocol ( N = 1,255) were 39.3% or 43.1% (adjusting for those who could not be located or contacted). Reasons for nonparticipation were travel, family obligations, and being too busy. Respondents were comparable to the recruitment pool on most demographic characteristics and health assessments. Discussion: Strengths of the protocol vis-à-vis similar studies include opportunities to link biological factors with diverse content from other MIDUS projects.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0898264310374355

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 18 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Weinstein M Vaupel JW Wachter KW 2008 Biosocial surveys Washington, DC The National Academies Press (Committee on Population, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education) 21977539

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dienberg Love, G., Seeman, T. E., Weinstein, M., & Ryff, C. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin, Madison,
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Georgetown University (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Venue
Journal of Aging and Health
Published
2010-09-27
Volume
22
Issue
8
Pages
1059-1080
ISSN
  • 0898-2643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6887
OpenAlex
W1967392886
Cited by
333
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 12
FWCI
13.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Aging and Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Georgetown University
  • National Institute on Aging (P01AG020166)
  • National Center for Research Resources ((M01 RR00865), M01RR023942, UL1RR025011, M01RR000865)
  • NIH Clinical Center
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Health, Environment, Cognitive Aging
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Keywords
bioindicators, MIDUS, midlife health, aging, biological evaluation, urine collection, bone densitometry, heart rate variability, blood pressure, salivary cortisol, respiration, response rate, non-participation, health and aging
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Blood Pressure, Clinical Protocols, Data Collection, Fasting, Female, Health Status, Health Surveys, Heart Rate, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Participation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Saliva, United States, Program Evaluation, Biomarkers, Bone Density

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