Selection bias resulting from the requirement for prior consent in observational research: a community cohort of people with ischaemic heart disease
- 1 September 2007
- Vol. 93 (9) , 1116-1120
- https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2006.111591
Abstract
To evaluate differences between adults who consent to participate in observational research and those who do not. Prospective, population-based cohort study. 35 randomised Irish general practices. 1609 adults with ischaemic heart disease identified in 2000-1. Medical records search, postal questionnaire and consent form in 2005-6. Differences in demographic and prognostic risk factors between consenters and non-consenters. At follow-up, charts were located for 1592 patients (98.9%). Questionnaires were sent to 1269 patients and 876 were returned (69%). Of these, 574 (65.5%) gave consent for participation in further research. Logistic regression identified four characteristics as independently positively predictive of consent to participation in further research among questionnaire responders: having undergone percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty was associated with an increased odds of consent, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.77 (95% CI 1.09 to 2.86), as was a last recorded blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg (OR = 1.45 (1.00 to 2.09)), a last recorded total cholesterol level <5 mmol/l (OR = 1.71 (1.16 to 2.54)) and being an ex-smoker rather than a current smoker or non-smoker (OR = 1.73 (1.17 to 2.57)). This research demonstrates the potential impact of consent bias in observational research on ischaemic heart disease, a disease of everyday clinical importance in Europe. It demonstrates that clinically important prognostic variables may be associated with consent preferences. Future cohorts, dependent upon prior written consent, may contain disproportionate numbers of those who have made healthy lifestyle decisions, have previously benefited from treatment or whose clinical risk factors are already well managed. As a result, the generalisability of such research may be diminished and the effects of treatments over- or underestimated.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Consent for the use of personal medical data in researchBMJ, 2006
- Confidentiality of personal health information used for researchBMJ, 2006
- A cross-sectional study of secondary cardiac care in general practice: impact of personal and practice characteristicsFamily Practice, 2006
- Bias from requiring explicit consent from all participants in observational research: prospective, population based studyBMJ, 2005
- Sharing patient data: competing demands of privacy, trust and research in primary care2005
- Public attitudes towards the use of primary care patient record data in medical research without consent: a qualitative studyJournal of Medical Ethics, 2004
- The requirement for prior consent to participate on survey response rates: a population-based survey in GrampianBMC Health Services Research, 2003
- Using patient-identifiable data for observational research and auditBMJ, 2000
- Potential Effect of Authorization Bias on Medical Record ResearchMayo Clinic Proceedings, 1999
- A simple method to assess exercise behavior in the community.1985