Hostname: page-component-797576ffbb-6mkhv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-12-02T16:37:09.519Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

Characteristics of Participants and Nonparticipants in the NHLBI Twin Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

R.R. Fabsitz*
Affiliation:
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
S. Kalousdian
Affiliation:
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
D. Carmelli
Affiliation:
SRI International, Menlo Park, California
D. Robinette
Affiliation:
National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC
J.C. Christian
Affiliation:
Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, USA
*
Federal Bldg. Rm. 3A17, Clinical and Genetic Epidemiology Branch, NHLBI, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not possible as this article does not have html content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The NHLBI Twin Study is a longitudinal study of cardiovascular disease risk factors in 514 pairs of white, middle aged, male, veteran twins. The initial examination took place between 1969-1973. Ten years later, 81% of the living cohort returned for a second examination. Data collected up to 30 years prior to recruitment for the initial examination were used to characterize participants and nonparticipants; data from the initial examination were used to characterize returnees and nonreturnees to the second examination. Participants had significantly lower diastolic blood pressure and higher socioeconomic status than nonparticipants as measured thirty years earlier. Between the first and second examinations, the mortality of participants was less than 50% of the mortality of nonparticipants. Returnees to the second examination had a better health profile at the initial examination than nonreturnees, with significantly lower levels of cigarette smoking, glucose intolerance, hypertension, and diabetes and higher levels of pulmonary function. However, returnees were more obese than nonreturnees. Thus, this study of cardiovascular disease risk factors in twins appears to be affected by response bias in a way similar to studies of individuals. Additional analyses of biases that may affect the genetic component of the study indicated that factors related to classical twin analyses were relatively unaffected by selection.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1988

References

REFERENCES

1. Criqui, MH, Barrett-Conner, E, Austin, M (1978): Differences between respondents and non-respondents in a population based cardiovascular disease study. Am J Epidemiol 108(5):367372.Google Scholar
2. Feinleib, M, Garrison, RJ, Fabsitz, RR, Christian, JC, Hrubec, Z, Borhani, NO, Kannel, WB, Rosenman, R, Schwartz, JT, Wagner, JO (1977): The NHLBI Twin Study of cardiovascular risk faeton: Methodology and summary of results. Am J Epidemiol 106(4): 284295.Google Scholar
3. Gordon, T, Moore, FE, Shurtleff, D and Dawber, TR (1959): Some methodologic problems in the long term study of cardiovascular disease: observations on the Framingham Study. J Chron Dis 10(3):186206.Google Scholar
4. Jablon, S, Neel, JV, Gershowitz, H, Atkinson, GF (1967): The NAS-NRC Twin Panel: Methods of construction of the panel, zygosity diagnosis, and proposed use. Am J Hum Genet 19(2):133161.Google Scholar
5. Kendler, KS, Holm, NV (1985): Differential enrollment in twin registries: Its effect on prevalence and concordance rates and estimates of genetic parameters. Acta Genet Med Gemellol 34:125140.Google Scholar
6. Lykken, DT, Tellegen, A, DeRubeis, R (1985): Volunteer bias in twin research: The rule of two thirds. Soc Biol 25(1):19.Google Scholar
7. Martin, NG, Wilson, SR (1982): Bias in the estimation of heritability from truncated samples of twins. Behav Genet 12(4):467472.Google Scholar
8. Rosenthal, R and Rosnow, RL (1975): The Volunteer Subject. New York: Wile-Interscience.Google Scholar
9. Seltzer, CC, Jablon, S (1974): Effects of selection on mortality. Am J Epidemiol 100(5):367372.Google Scholar
10. Standards of Physical Examination During Mobilization: Mobilization Regulations No.1-9. 61 pp War Department, Washington, DC, 10 15, 1942.Google Scholar