This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Engel, L. S. Articles by Alavanja, M. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Engel, L. S. Articles by Alavanja, M. C.

Factors Associated with Refusal to Provide a Buccal Cell Sample in the Agricultural Health Study

Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland [L. S. E., N. R., R. E. T., M. C. A.]; Battelle’s Centers for Public Health Research and Evaluation, Durham, North Carolina [C. K.]; and Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa [C. F. L., N. L-S.]

Epidemiological studies are increasingly collecting buccal cells and other sources of DNA for genetic analysis. However, high refusal rates raise concerns about possible selection bias. This study examines the subject characteristics associated with refusal or failure to provide a buccal cell sample. Subjects were male farmers in the Agricultural Health Study, which is being conducted in Iowa and North Carolina. As part of a 5-year follow-up, cohort members were contacted by telephone and asked to participate in a telephone interview and to consent to providing a buccal cell sample using a kit that was mailed to them. Demographic, lifestyle, disease, and occupational characteristics were compared between consenters who returned a sample ("compliers"), nonconsenters ("refusers"), and consenters who failed to return a sample ("noncompliers"). Compliers (n = 8794), refusers (n = 3178), and noncompliers (n = 3008) were quite similar, although compliers tended to be slightly older. Although some significant differences between these groups were observed, the magnitude of these differences was generally small, usually no more than a few percentage points. In conclusion, this study found little difference between male farmers who agreed to provide buccal cell samples versus those who either refused to provide a sample or who agreed but failed to return the sample. Observed differences were typically small and would be unlikely to compromise etiologic associations identified in such a prospective study. In short, there appears to be little selection bias in the Agricultural Health Study buccal cell collection process, further supporting the use of such mailed collection kits in epidemiological research.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M A Espeland, K Dotson, S A Jaramillo, S E Kahn, B Harrison, M Montez, J P Foreyt, B Montgomery, W C Knowler, and Look AHEAD Research Group Consent for genetics studies among clinical trial participants: findings from Action for Health in Diabetes (Look AHEAD) Clinical Trials, October 1, 2006; 3(5): 443 - 456. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. M. Morimoto, E. White, and P. A. Newcomb Selection Bias in the Assessment of Gene-Environment Interaction in Case-Control Studies Am. J. Epidemiol., August 1, 2003; 158(3): 259 - 263. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]