Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

Shaefer and Edin's book ($2 a Day) cited in piece on political debate over plight of impoverished Americans

Eisenberg tracks factors affecting both mental health and athletic/academic performance among college athletes

Shapiro says Americans' low spending reflects "cruel lesson" about the dangers of debt

Highlights

Susan Murphy elected to the National Academy of Sciences

Maggie Levenstein named director of ISR's Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research

Arline Geronimus receives 2016 Harold R. Johnson Diversity Service Award

PSC spring 2016 newsletter: Kristin Seefeldt, Brady West, newly funded projects, ISR Runs for Bob, and more

Next Brown Bag

PSC Brown Bags
will resume fall 2016

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

Publication Abstract

Belanger, K., S. Buka, D. Cherry, D. Dudley, Michael R. Elliott, D. Hale, I. Hertz-Picciotto, J. Illuzzi, N. Paneth, J. Robbins, E. Triche, and M. Bracken. 2013. "Implementing Provider-based Sampling for the National Children's Study: Opportunities and Challenges." Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 27(1): 20-26.

Background: 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.

DOI:10.1111/ppe.12005 (Full Text)

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next