Self-selection and bias in a large prospective pregnancy cohort in Norway.

Self-selection in epidemiological studies may introduce selection bias and influence the validity of study results. To evaluate potential bias due to self-selection in a large prospective pregnancy cohort in Norway, the authors studied differences in prevalence estimates and association measures between study participants and all women giving birth in Norway. Women who agreed to participate in the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (43.5% of invited; n = 73 579) were compared with all women giving birth in Norway (n = 398 849) using data from the population-based Medical Birth Registry of Norway in 2000-2006. Bias in the prevalence of 23 exposure and outcome variables was measured as the ratio of relative frequencies, whereas bias in exposure-outcome associations of eight relationships was measured as the ratio of odds ratios. Statistically significant relative differences in prevalence estimates between the cohort participants and the total population were found for all variables, except for maternal epilepsy, chronic hypertension and pre-eclampsia. There was a strong under-representation of the youngest women (<25 years), those living alone, mothers with more than two previous births and with previous stillbirths (relative deviation 30-45%). In addition, smokers, women with stillbirths and neonatal death were markedly under-represented in the cohort (relative deviation 22-43%), while multivitamin and folic acid supplement users were over-represented (relative deviation 31-43%). Despite this, no statistically relative differences in association measures were found between participants and the total population regarding the eight exposure-outcome associations. Using data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway, this study suggests that prevalence estimates of exposures and outcomes, but not estimates of exposure-outcome associations are biased due to self-selection in the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study.

[1]  E. Barrett-Connor,et al.  The effect of response bias on the odds ratio. , 1981, American journal of epidemiology.

[2]  R. T. Lie,et al.  Fetal and maternal contributions to risk of pre-eclampsia: population based study , 1998, BMJ.

[3]  U. Hanson,et al.  Maternal complications in women with chronic hypertension: a population‐based cohort study , 2005, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[4]  K. Leveno,et al.  Birth weight in relation to morbidity and mortality among newborn infants. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  P. Magnus,et al.  Cohort profile: the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). , 2006, International journal of epidemiology.

[6]  J. Douwes,et al.  Feasibility of recruiting a birth cohort through the Internet: the experience of the NINFEA cohort , 2007, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[7]  Henrik Toft Sørensen,et al.  The Danish National Birth Cohort - its background, structure and aim , 2001, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[8]  S. Vollset,et al.  Folic acid and multivitamin supplement use and risk of placental abruption: a population-based registry study. , 2008, American journal of epidemiology.

[9]  M. Frydenberg,et al.  Does Low Participation in Cohort Studies Induce Bias? , 2006, Epidemiology.

[10]  L. Irgens,et al.  The effect of smoking and hypertensive disorders on abruptio placentae in Norway 1999–2002 , 2007, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[11]  Richard Doll,et al.  Mortality in relation to smoking: 22 years' observations on female British doctors. , 1980, British medical journal.

[12]  M. Pembrey,et al.  ALSPAC--the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. I. Study methodology. , 2001, Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology.

[13]  L. Irgens,et al.  The Medical Birth Registry of Norway. Epidemiological research and surveillance throughout 30 years , 2000, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[14]  A. Daltveit,et al.  Secular trends in socio-economic status and the implications for preterm birth. , 2006, Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology.

[15]  J. Golding The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC)--study design and collaborative opportunities. , 2004, European journal of endocrinology.

[16]  J. Robins,et al.  A Structural Approach to Selection Bias , 2004, Epidemiology.

[17]  S Greenland,et al.  Response and follow-up bias in cohort studies. , 1977, American journal of epidemiology.

[18]  H. Meltzer,et al.  Patterns and predictors of folic acid supplement use among pregnant women: the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study. , 2006, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[19]  R. Kirby,et al.  Prenatal Smoking and Risk of Intrapartum Stillbirth , 2007, Archives of environmental & occupational health.

[20]  R. Munger,et al.  The effect of follow-up on limiting non-participation bias in genetic epidemiologic investigations , 1998, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[21]  A. Gulsvik,et al.  Nonresponse in a community cohort study: predictors and consequences for exposure-disease associations. , 2002, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[22]  S. H. Fox,et al.  Birth weight and smoking during pregnancy--effect modification by maternal age. , 1994, American journal of epidemiology.

[23]  J. Manson,et al.  Prospective Study of Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes and Risk of Stroke Subtypes , 2007, Diabetes Care.

[24]  J. LoGerfo,et al.  Correlates and effect of non-response in a postpartum survey of obstetrical care quality. , 1997, Journal of clinical epidemiology.