Case-Control Study of Congenital Anomalies: Study Methods and Nonresponse Bias Assessment.

Eng A; Mannetje AT; Ellison-Loschmann L; Borman B; Cheng S; Lawlor DA; Douwes J; Pearce N

Case-Control Study of Congenital Anomalies: Study Methods and Nonresponse Bias Assessment.

dc.citation.issue	2
dc.citation.volume	117
dc.contributor.author	Eng A
dc.contributor.author	Mannetje AT
dc.contributor.author	Ellison-Loschmann L
dc.contributor.author	Borman B
dc.contributor.author	Cheng S
dc.contributor.author	Lawlor DA
dc.contributor.author	Douwes J
dc.contributor.author	Pearce N
dc.coverage.spatial	United States
dc.date.accessioned	2025-02-28T00:46:05Z
dc.date.available	2025-02-28T00:46:05Z
dc.date.issued	2025-02-20
dc.description.abstract	BACKGROUND: To describe the methods of a congenital anomalies case-control study conducted in New Zealand, discuss the encountered methodological difficulties, and evaluate the potential for nonresponse bias. METHODS: The potential cases (n = 2710) were New Zealand live births in 2007-2009 randomly selected from the New Zealand Congenital Anomalies Registry. The potential controls (n = 2989) included live births identified from the Maternity and Newborn Information System, frequency matched to cases by the child's year of birth and sex. Mothers were invited to complete an interview covering demographic, lifestyle, and environmental factors. Response probabilities for case and control mothers were evaluated in relation to maternal age, deprivation, occupation, and ethnicity, available from the Electoral Roll, and inverse probability weights (IPWs) for participation were calculated. Odds ratios (ORs) for key demographic and selected risk factors were estimated through unconditional logistic regression, with and without IPW. RESULTS: A total of 652 (24%) of case mothers and 505 (17%) of control mothers completed the interview. Younger and more deprived mothers were underrepresented among the participants, particularly for controls, resulting in inflated ORs of associations with congenital anomalies for younger age, Māori ethnicity, deprivation, and risk factors under study, such as blue-collar occupations and smoking, indicative of nonresponse bias. Nonresponse bias was minimized through IPW, resulting in ORs and exposure prevalence estimates similar to those based on the prerecruitment sample. CONCLUSIONS: Attaining high participation rates was difficult in this study that was conducted in new mothers, particularly for the controls. The resulting nonresponse bias was minimized through IPW.
dc.description.confidential	false
dc.edition.edition	Feb 2025
dc.format.pagination	e2457-
dc.identifier.author-url	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39976369
dc.identifier.citation	Eng A, Mannetje AT, Ellison-Loschmann L, Borman B, Cheng S, Lawlor DA, Douwes J, Pearce N. (2025). Case-Control Study of Congenital Anomalies: Study Methods and Nonresponse Bias Assessment.. Birth Defects Res. 117. 2. (pp. e2457-).
dc.identifier.doi	10.1002/bdr2.2457
dc.identifier.eissn	2472-1727
dc.identifier.elements-type	journal-article
dc.identifier.issn	2472-1727
dc.identifier.number	e2457
dc.identifier.uri	https://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/72544
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	Wiley Periodicals LLC
dc.publisher.uri	http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdr2.2457
dc.relation.isPartOf	Birth Defects Res
dc.rights	(c) 2025 The Author/s
dc.rights	CC BY-NC 4.0
dc.rights.uri	https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.subject	case‐control studies
dc.subject	congenital anomalies
dc.subject	epidemiologic methods
dc.subject	response‐bias
dc.subject	Humans
dc.subject	Case-Control Studies
dc.subject	Female
dc.subject	Congenital Abnormalities
dc.subject	New Zealand
dc.subject	Adult
dc.subject	Bias
dc.subject	Odds Ratio
dc.subject	Risk Factors
dc.subject	Male
dc.subject	Maternal Age
dc.subject	Infant, Newborn
dc.subject	Mothers
dc.subject	Registries
dc.title	Case-Control Study of Congenital Anomalies: Study Methods and Nonresponse Bias Assessment.
dc.type	Journal article
pubs.elements-id	499772
pubs.organisational-group	Other