IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v3y2013i4p2158244013511260.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participation Bias Assessment in Three High-Impact Journals

Author

Listed:
  • Claire Keeble
  • Stuart Barber
  • Graham Richard Law
  • Paul D. Baxter

Abstract

Studies into participation bias have examined participation trends, where it occurs, the factors affecting it, and methods to try to reduce it. However, some authors only discuss participation bias at the end of the study, some acknowledge it and apply a method to try to reduce it, while others ignore it or dismiss it as negligible. Issues of three high-impact epidemiology journals were examined; 81 articles were read and reviewed for potential participation bias. Categories were used to classify the approach taken to participation bias and the results recorded. Of the 81 articles considered, 42 (51%) were eligible and could have suffered from participation bias. It was found that 57% of these articles ignored the effects of participation bias, while 17% only considered it briefly in the discussion. Few articles (22%) attempted to reduce the participation bias, with over half of these using unsuitable methods (55%). This review highlights how participation bias is often not considered and hence the conclusions drawn from these studies may not be correct.

Suggested Citation

  • Claire Keeble & Stuart Barber & Graham Richard Law & Paul D. Baxter, 2013. "Participation Bias Assessment in Three High-Impact Journals," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(4), pages 21582440135, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:3:y:2013:i:4:p:2158244013511260
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244013511260
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244013511260
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244013511260?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geneletti, Sara & Mason, Alexina & Best, Nicky, 2011. "Adjusting for selection effects in epidemiologic studies: why sensitivity analysis is the only “solution”," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 31520, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Yannan Jiang & Alastair J. Scott & Christopher J. Wild, 2011. "Adjusting for Non‐Response in Population‐Based Case‐Control Studies," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 79(2), pages 145-159, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Glenn W. Harrison, 2017. "Behavioral responses to surveys about nicotine dependence," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 114-123, December.
    2. Morrissey, Karyn & Kinderman, Peter & Pontin, Eleanor & Tai, Sara & Schwannauer, Mathias, 2016. "Web based health surveys: Using a Two Step Heckman model to examine their potential for population health analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 45-53.
    3. David McConnell & Conor Hickey & Norma Bargary & Lea Trela-Larsen & Cathal Walsh & Michael Barry & Roisin Adams, 2021. "Understanding the Challenges and Uncertainties of Seroprevalence Studies for SARS-CoV-2," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-19, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:3:y:2013:i:4:p:2158244013511260. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.