Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/30354
Title: | Impacts of study design on sample size, participation bias, and outcome measurement: A case study from bicycling research | Authors: | Branion-Calles, Michael Winters, Meghan Nelson, Trisalyn De Nazelle, Audrey INT PANIS, Luc Avila-Palencia, Ione Anaya-Boig, Esther Rojas-Rueda, David DONS, Evi Götschi, Thomas |
Issue Date: | 2019 | Publisher: | Elsevier | Source: | Journal of Transport & Health, 15 (Art N° ARTN 100651) | Abstract: | Introduction: Measuring bicycling behaviour is critical to bicycling research. A common study design question is whether to measure bicycling behaviour once (cross-sectional) or multiple times (longitudinal). The Physical Activity through Sustainable Transport Approaches (PASTA) project is a longitudinal cohort study of over 10,000 participants from seven European cities over two years. We used PASTA data as a case study to investigate how measuring once or multiple times impacted three factors: a) sample size b) participation bias and c) accuracy of bicycling behaviour estimates. Methods: We compared two scenarios: i) as if only the baseline data were collected (cross-sectional approach) and ii) as if the baseline plus repeat follow-ups were collected (longitudinal approach). We compared each approach in terms of differences in sample size, distribution of sociodemographic characteristics, and bicycling behaviour. In the cross-sectional approach, we measured participants long-term bicycling behaviour by asking for recall of typical weekly habits , while in the longitudinal approach we measured by taking the average of bicycling reported for each 7-day period. Results: Relative to longitudinal, the cross-sectional approach provided a larger sample size and slightly better representation of certain sociodemographic groups, with worse estimates of long-term bicycling behaviour. The longitudinal approach suffered from participation bias, especially the drop-out of more frequent bicyclists. The cross-sectional approach underestimated the proportion of the population that bicycled, as it captured 'typical' behaviour rather than 7-day recall. The magnitude and directionality of the difference between typical weekly (cross-sectional https://doi. | Keywords: | Bicycling;Bias;Exposure;Survey participation;Longitudinal;Cross-sectional;Study design | Document URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/1942/30354 | ISSN: | 2214-1405 | DOI: | 10.1016/j.jth.2019.100651 | ISI #: | WOS:000505158300017 | Rights: | 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.T | Category: | A1 | Type: | Journal Contribution |
Appears in Collections: | Research publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
final_submitted.pdf | Peer-reviewed author version | 666.87 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Branion-Calles,2019.pdf Restricted Access | Published version | 1.37 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
SCOPUSTM
Citations
1
checked on Sep 2, 2020
WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations
4
checked on Apr 24, 2024
Page view(s)
42
checked on Jun 30, 2022
Download(s)
24
checked on Jun 30, 2022
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.