ABSTRACT
Background Missing data may induce bias when analysing longitudinal population surveys. We aimed to tackle this problem in the 1970 British Cohort Study (BCS70)
Methods We utilised a data-driven approach to address missing data issues in BCS70. Our method consisted of a 3-step process to identify important predictors of non-response from a pool of ∼20,000 variables from 9 sweeps in 18037 individuals. We used parametric regression models to identify a moderate set of variables (predictors of non-response) that can be used as auxiliary variables in principled methods of missing data handling to restore baseline sample representativeness.
Results Individuals from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds, increased number of older siblings, non-response at previous sweeps and ethnic minority background were consistently associated with non-response in BCS70 at both early (ages 5-16) and later sweeps (ages 26-46). Country of birth, parents not being married and higher father’s age at completion of education were additional consistent predictors of non-response only at early sweeps. Moreover, being male, greater number of household moves, low cognitive ability, and non-participation in the UK 1997 elections were additional consistent predictors of non-response only at later sweeps. Using this information, we were able to restore sample representativeness, as we could replicate the original sample distribution of father’s social class and cognitive ability and reduce the bias due to missing data in the relationship between father’s socioeconomic status and mortality.
Conclusions We provide a set of variables that researchers can utilise as auxiliary variables to address missing data issues in BCS70 and restore sample representativeness.
Key Messages
We aimed to address the problem of missing data in the 1970 British Cohort Study (BCS70) caused by non-response at different sweeps
We identified a set of predictors of non-response that can successfully restore baseline sample representativeness across sweeps
The information from this study can be used from researchers in the future to utilise appropriate auxiliary variables to tackle problems due to missing data in BCS70
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
N/A
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
We utilised data with a low level of sensitivity and disclosivity, available for download from the UK Data Service under their standard End User Licence (EUL). Ethics approval is obtained from a National Health Service Research Ethics Committee in advance of each sweep of BCS70 data collection.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon request to Dr Michail Katsoulis
