1997Journal of Public Health DentistryRequires access

Evaluation of Bias and Logistics in a Survey of Adults at Increased Risk for Oral Health Decrements

Gregg H. Gilbert, R. Paul Duncan, Andrew M. Kulley, Raymond T. Coward, Marc W. Heft

Open publisher page 89 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Designing research to include sufficient respondents in groups at highest risk for oral health decrements can present unique challenges. Our purpose was to evaluate bias and logistics in this survey of adults at increased risk for oral health decrements. METHODS: We used a telephone survey methodology that employed both listed numbers and random digit dialing to identify dentate persons 45 years old or older and to oversample blacks, poor persons, and residents of nonmetropolitan counties. At a second stage, a subsample of the respondents to the initial telephone screening was selected for further study, which consisted of a baseline in-person interview and a clinical examination. We assessed bias due to: (1) limiting the sample to households with telephones, (2) using predominantly listed numbers instead of random digit dialing, and (3) nonresponse at two stages of data collection. RESULTS: While this approach apparently created some biases in the sample, they were small in magnitude. Specifically, limiting the sample to households with telephones biased the sample overall toward more females, larger households, and fewer functionally impaired persons. Using predominantly listed numbers led to a modest bias toward selection of persons more likely to be younger, healthier, female, have had a recent dental visit, and reside in smaller households. Blacks who were selected randomly at a second stage were more likely to participate in baseline data gathering than their white counterparts. Comparisons of the data obtained in this survey with those from recent national surveys suggest that this methodology for sampling high-risk groups did not substantively bias the sample with respect to two important dental parameters, prevalence of edentulousness and dental care use, nor were conclusions about multivariate associations with dental care recency substantively affected. CONCLUSIONS: This method of sampling persons at high risk for oral health decrements resulted in only modest bias with respect to the population of interest.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVES: Designing research to include sufficient respondents in groups at highest risk for oral health decrements can present unique challenges. Our purpose was to evaluate bias and logistics in this survey of adults at increased risk for oral health decrements. METHODS: We used a telephone survey methodology that employed both listed numbers and random digit dialing to identify dentate persons 45 years old or older and to oversample blacks, poor persons, and residents of nonmetropolitan counties. At a second stage, a subsample of the respondents to the initial telephone screening was selected for further study, which consisted of a baseline in-person interview and a clinical examination. We assessed bias due to: (1) limiting the sample to households with telephones, (2) using predominantly listed numbers instead of random digit dialing, and (3) nonresponse at two stages of data collection. RESULTS: While this approach apparently created some biases in the sample, they were small in magnitude. Specifically, limiting the sample to households with telephones biased the sample overall toward more females, larger households, and fewer functionally impaired persons. Using predominantly listed numbers led to a modest bias toward selection of persons more likely to be younger, healthier, female, have had a recent dental visit, and reside in smaller households. Blacks who were selected randomly at a second stage were more likely to participate in baseline data gathering than their white counterparts. Comparisons of the data obtained in this survey with those from recent national surveys suggest that this methodology for sampling high-risk groups did not substantively bias the sample with respect to two important dental parameters, prevalence of edentulousness and dental care use, nor were conclusions about multivariate associations with dental care recency substantively affected. CONCLUSIONS: This method of sampling persons at high risk for oral health decrements resulted in only modest bias with respect to the population of interest.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 89 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVES: Designing research to include sufficient respondents in groups at highest risk for oral health decrements can present unique challenges. Our purpose was to evaluate bias and logistics in this survey of adults at increased risk for oral health decrements. METHODS: We used a telephone survey methodology that employed both listed numbers and random digit dialing to identify dentate persons 45 years old or older and to oversample blacks, poor persons, and residents of nonmetropolitan counties. At a second stage, a subsample of the respondents to the initial telephone screening was selected for further study, which consisted of a baseline in-person interview and a clinical examination. We assessed bias due to: (1) limiting the sample to households with telephones, (2) using predominantly listed numbers instead of random digit dialing, and (3) nonresponse at two stages of data collection. RESULTS: While this approach apparently created some biases in the sample, they were small in magnitude. Specifically, limiting the sample to households with telephones biased the sample overall toward more females, larger households, and fewer functionally impaired persons. Using predominantly listed numbers led to a modest bias toward selection of persons more likely to be younger, healthier, female, have had a recent dental visit, and reside in smaller households. Blacks who were selected randomly at a second stage were more likely to participate in baseline data gathering than their white counterparts. Comparisons of the data obtained in this survey with those from recent national surveys suggest that this methodology for sampling high-risk groups did not substantively bias the sample with respect to two important dental parameters, prevalence of edentulousness and dental care use, nor were conclusions about multivariate associations with dental care recency substantively affected. CONCLUSIONS: This method of sampling persons at high risk for oral health decrements resulted in only modest bias with respect to the population of interest.

Key concepts: Random digit dialing, Selection bias, Telephone interview, Sample (material), Limiting, Data collection, Medicine, Sampling bias

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Evaluation of Bias and Logistics in a Survey of Adults at Increased Risk for Oral Health Decrements — Research Paper | ScholarLens