Baseline recruitment and analyses of nonresponse of the Heinz Nixdorf recall study: Identifiability of phone numbers as the major determinant of response
- 310 Downloads
The Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study is an ongoing population-based prospective cardiovascular cohort study of the Ruhr area in Germany. This paper focuses on the recruitment strategy and its response results including a comparison of participants of the baseline examination with nonparticipants. Random samples of the general population were drawn from residents’ registration offices including men and women aged 45–74 years. We used a multi-mode contact approach including an invitational letter, a maximum of two reminder letters and phone calls for the recruitment of study subjects. Nonparticipants were asked to fill in a short questionnaire. We calculated proportions of response, contact, cooperation and recruitment efficacy to characterize the participation. Overall, 4487 eligible subjects participated in our study. Although the elderly (65–75 years) had the highest contact proportion, the cooperation proportion was the lowest among both men and women. The recruitment efficacy proportion was highest among subjects aged 55–64 years. The identifiability of the phone number of study subjects was an important determinant of response. The recruitment efficacy proportion among subjects without an identified phone number was 11.4% as compared to 65.3% among subjects with an identified phone number. The majority of subjects agreed to participate after one invitational letter only (52.6%). A second reminding letter contributed only very few participants to the study. Nonparticipants were more often current smokers than participants and less often belonged to the highest social class. Living in a regular relationship with a partner was more often reported among participants than nonparticipants.
KeywordsCohort studies Epidemiologic methods Germany Selection bias
electron beam computed tomography
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Hennekens, CH, Buring, JE, Peto, R 1992Aspirin in ischemic heart diseaseN Engl J Med32714551456Google Scholar
- 5.Schmermund, A, Möhlenkamp, S, Stang, A, Grönemeyer, D, Seibel, R, Hirche, H, Mann, K, Siffert, W, Lauterbach, K, Siegrist, J, Jöckel, KH, Erbel, R 2002for the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study Investigative Group. Assessment of clinically silent atherosclerotic disease and established and novel risk factors for predicting myocardial infarction and cardiac death in healthy middle-aged subjects: rationale and design of the Heinz Nixdorf Recall StudyAm Heart J144212218PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.Latza, U, Stang, A, Bergmann, M, Kroke, A, Sauer, S, Holle, R, Kamtsiuris, P, Terschüren, C, Hoffmann, W 2004The problem of response in epidemiological studies in Germany (part I) [Zum Problem der Response in epidemiologischen Studien in Deutschland (Teil I)]Gesundheitswesen66326336PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 9.Rabe, E, Pannier-Fischer, E, Bromen, K, Schuldt, K, Stang, A, Poncar, C, Wittenhorst, M, Bock, E, Weber, S, Jöckel, KH 2003Bonn Vein study of the German Society of Phlebology [Bonner Venenstudie der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Phlebologie]Phlebologie32114Google Scholar
- 11.Hoffmann, W, Terschüren, C, Holle, R, Kamtsiuris, P, Bergmann, M, Kroke, A, Sauer, S, Stang, A, Latza, U 2004The problem of response in epidemiologic studies in Germany (part II) [Zum Problem der Response in epidemiologischen Studien in Deutschland (Teil II)]Gesundheitswesen66482491PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Akker, M, Buntinx, F, Metsemakers, JFM, Knotterus, JA 1998Morbidity in responders and non-responders in a register-based population surveyFamily Prac15261263Google Scholar
- 26.Hartge, P 1999Raising response rates: getting to yesEpidemiol10105106Google Scholar