Show simple item record

Implementing Provider‐based Sampling for the National Children's Study: Opportunities and Challenges

dc.contributor.authorBelanger, Kathleenen_US
dc.contributor.authorBuka, Stephenen_US
dc.contributor.authorCherry, Debra C.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDudley, Donald J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorElliott, Michael R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHale, Daniel E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHertz‐picciotto, Irvaen_US
dc.contributor.authorIlluzzi, Jessica L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPaneth, Nigelen_US
dc.contributor.authorRobbins, James M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorTriche, Elizabeth W.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBracken, Michael B.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-12-11T17:37:31Z
dc.date.available2014-03-03T15:09:25Zen_US
dc.date.issued2013-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationBelanger, Kathleen; Buka, Stephen; Cherry, Debra C.; Dudley, Donald J.; Elliott, Michael R.; Hale, Daniel E.; Hertz‐picciotto, Irva ; Illuzzi, Jessica L.; Paneth, Nigel; Robbins, James M.; Triche, Elizabeth W.; Bracken, Michael B. (2013). "Implementing Providerâ based Sampling for the National Children's Study: Opportunities and Challenges." Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology (1): 20-26. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/94504>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0269-5022en_US
dc.identifier.issn1365-3016en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/94504
dc.description.abstractBackground:  The National Children's Study (NCS) was established as a national probability sample of births to prospectively study children's health starting from in utero to age 21. The primary sampling unit was 105 study locations (typically a county). The secondary sampling unit was the geographic unit (segment), but this was subsequently perceived to be an inefficient strategy. Methods and Results:  This paper proposes that second‐stage sampling using prenatal care providers is an efficient and cost‐effective method for deriving a national probability sample of births in the US. It offers a rationale for provider‐based sampling and discusses a number of strategies for assembling a sampling frame of providers. Also presented are special challenges to provider‐based sampling pregnancies, including optimising key sample parameters, retaining geographic diversity, determining the types of providers to include in the sample frame, recruiting women who do not receive prenatal care, and using community engagement to enrol women. There will also be substantial operational challenges to sampling provider groups. Conclusion:  We argue that probability sampling is mandatory to capture the full variation in exposure and outcomes expected in a national cohort study, to provide valid and generalisable risk estimates, and to accurately estimate policy (such as screening) benefits from associations reported in the NCS.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.subject.otherEpidemiology Methodsen_US
dc.subject.otherMulti‐Stage Samplingen_US
dc.subject.otherNational Children's Studyen_US
dc.subject.otherSampling Methodsen_US
dc.subject.otherProbability Samplingen_US
dc.titleImplementing Provider‐based Sampling for the National Children's Study: Opportunities and Challengesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPediatricsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumBiostatistics Department, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arboren_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Texas Health Sciences Center at Tyler, Tyler, TXen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherSchool of Public Health, Yale University Schools of Public Health and Medicine, New Haven, CTen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Pediatrics and Department of Psychiatry, University of Arkansas, Little Rock, ARen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of California at Davis, Davis, CA, anden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Pediatrics & Human Development, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MIen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health Sciences Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TXen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, anden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Epidemiology, Brown University, Providence, RIen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatisticsen_US
dc.identifier.pmid23215706en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/94504/1/ppe12005.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/ppe.12005en_US
dc.identifier.sourcePaediatric and Perinatal Epidemiologyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePocock SJ, Simon R. Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics 1975; 31: 103 – 115.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMichael RT, O'Muircheartaigh CA. Design priorities and disciplinary perspectives: the case of the US National Children's Study. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 2008; 171: 465 – 480.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMontaquila JM, Brick JM, Curtin LR. Statistical and practical issues in the design of a national probability sample of births for the Vanguard Study of the National Children's Study. Statistics in Medicine 2010; 29: 1368 – 1376.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHirschfeld S, Songco D, Kramer BS, Guttmacher AE. National Children's Study: update in 2010. Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine 2011; 78: 119 – 125.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWilliams RL. A note on robust variance estimation for cluster‐correlated data. Biometrics 2000; 56: 645 – 646.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceElam‐Evans LD, Adams MM, Gargiullo PM, Kiely JL, Marks JS. Trends in the percentage of women who received no prenatal care in the United States, 1980–1992: contributions of the demographic and risk effects. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1996; 87: 575 – 580.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDeville J‐C SC‐E. Calibration estimators in survey sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1992; 87: 376 – 382.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.