Socioeconomic, Demographic, Occupational, and Health Factors Associated with Participation in a Long-term Epidemiologic Survey: A Prospective Study of the French GAZEL Cohort and Its Target Population

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to examine personal and health factors, both at the beginning of the study and thereafter, associated with participation in the GAZEL cohort, set up in 1989 in a large French company. The authors used logistic regression to analyze the associations between participation and data available for both participants (n = 20,093) and nonparticipants (n = 24,829). Higher participation was associated with male sex, marriage, children, managerial status, and residence in particular regions. Among men, lower participation was associated with sick leave in the year before recruitment and afterwards. During follow-up, participation was negatively associated with several groups of diseases, especially those associated with alcohol consumption. The risk of upper respiratory and digestive tract and lung cancer during follow-up was higher among nonparticipants. The same phenomenon occurred among women, but less markedly, for cancers of the breast and genital organs. During follow-up, mortality among men was higher among nonparticipants, especially for alcohol-related diseases. The association among women was less strong. Among men, but not among women, diseases caused by alcohol, smoking, or dangerous behavior were the primary reason for the health differences observed between participants and nonparticipants. Overall, the most important determinants of participation were cultural factors and lifestyle behaviors.

Explorando os efeitos da recusa de participação na linha de base ao seguimento sobre a validade em estudos de coorte

“…Entretanto, o nível ocupacional é um dos fatores que mais consistentemente vem sendo apontado como associado à recusa de participação em estudos de coorte e a mortalidade o desfecho, em geral, mais estudado em função da disponibilidade ampla de dados de mortalidade para a realização do seguimento passivo [4][5][6]12 . Quanto a outros fatores que poderiam influenciar a validade do estudo, os resultados podem ser interpretados como o que ocorreria nesse cenário particular.…”

“…3 Professora Adjunta da Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública da FIOCRUZ -Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brasil. 4 Doutoranda do Programa de Pós-graduação em Saúde Coletiva do Instituto de Estudos em Saúde Coletiva da UFRJ -Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brasil. 5 Tecnologista sênior da Fundação Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE) -Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brasil.…”

“…Fatores como idade, sexo, renda, nível educacional, raça, estado conjugal, tabagismo e estado de saúde podem influenciar a participação em estudos longitudinais [3][4][5][6] . Por outro lado, maior risco de mortalidade foi observado em não participantes quando comparados aos participantes [5][6][7] .…”

Road crash involvement and professional status: A prospective study using the French Gazel cohort

“…They thus have close lifestyles and current and retired staff has a similar access to the health system: the disparities between different social positions are thus lower than in the general French population. Finally, irrespective of social position, disorders caused by alcohol, smoking, or other dangerous types of behaviour, especially among males affect the participation to the annual GAZEL questionnaire (Goldberg et al 2001). Such bias towards those with better health or less dangerous behaviour could lead to select subjects with safer road behaviour.…”

Social isolation, survey nonresponse, and nonresponse bias: An empirical evaluation using social network data within an organization

“…Therefore, teaching appointment is included as a control variable and represents the percentage of a faculty member's official appointment that is devoted to teaching. Fourth, persons who view a survey sponsor positively, either due to positive affiliation with the sponsor or viewing the sponsor as a trusted authority figure, are more likely to participate in the survey than people who view the sponsor negatively (Donald, 1960;Goldberg et al, 2001;Jones, 1979;Edwards et al, 2002;Faria and Dickenson, 1996;Goyder, 1987;Groves and Couper, 1998;Jones and Lang, 1980;Jones and Linda, 1978;Perneger et al, 2005;Sudman and Ferber, 1974;Wu and Vosika, 1983). In some instances, the sponsor may have provided resources for the sampled individual, potentially also invoking a social or economic exchange relationship (Dillman et al, 2009;Goyder, 1987).…”