Skip to main content

Table 4 Estimated adjusted odds ratios for attrition in wave 2, stratified by racef, g

From: Modelling attrition and nonparticipation in a longitudinal study of prostate cancer

  

Deceased or Frailb, c

Lost to Follow-Upb, d

Refusale

  

AAa

EAa

AA

EA

AA

EA

Age at Diagnosis

70–79

2.03 (0.89–4.61)

2.30 (0.98–5.44)

0.36 (0.14–0.93)

0.27 (0.06–1.23)

1.03 (0.5–2.11)

1.38 (0.73–2.60)

60–69

0.81 (0.37–1.73)

1.06 (0.45–2.48)

0.37 (0.18–0.73)

0.47 (0.15–1.53)

0.99 (0.57–1.73)

0.84 (0.46–1.53)

Study Phase

Post-Ka

0.41 (0.20–0.88)

0.46 (0.22–0.94)

1.12 (0.48–2.62)

0.96 (0.25–3.72)

0.76 (0.40–1.45)

0.73 (0.38–1.40)

Income

$0–30,000

13.42 (0.84–214.98)

1.49 (0.58–3.78)

2.48 (0.86–7.13)

8.65 (1.88–39.77)

1.01 (0.44–2.30)

2.79 (1.34–5.81)

$30,001–70,000

14.13 (0.88–225.87)

1.21 (0.56–2.63)

1.48 (0.49–4.45)

1.99 (0.44–9.05)

1.34 (0.61–2.95)

1.96 (1.07–3.58)

Education

≤ High School

1.37 (0.63–2.99)

1.15 (0.55–2.42)

1.92 (0.90–4.09)

2.18 (0.68–7.05)

1.34 (0.75–2.41)

1.29 (0.73–2.30)

REALMa Score

≤ 6th

1.36 (0.58–3.21)

0.95 (0.26–3.44)

1.18 (0.51–2.74)

0.46 (0.07–2.91)

0.94 (0.47–1.86)

0.81 (0.33–2.00)

7th - 8th

0.47 (0.18–1.20)

2.20 (0.98–4.92)

0.74 (0.30–1.80)

1.25 (0.35–4.52)

0.62 (0.31–1.21)

0.64 (0.30–1.39)

Cancer Aggressiveness

Intermediate

1.12 (0.55–2.30)

1.16 (0.55–2.45)

1.01 (0.49–2.06)

0.66 (0.20–2.23)

1.03 (0.59–1.80)

0.57 (0.32–1.01)

High

2.98 (1.34–6.62)

4.09 (1.94–8.63)

2.17 (0.99–4.76)

1.17 (0.28–4.90)

2.51 (1.34–4.72)

1.07 (0.54–2.10)

PPCa Score

 

0.77 (0.54–1.09)

0.91 (0.60–1.38)

1.23 (0.83–1.81)

1.05 (0.53–2.10)

0.76 (0.58–1.01)

0.70 (0.51–0.96)

CCIa

 

1.26 (1.03–1.54)

1.17 (0.98–1.39)

0.86 (0.65–1.12)

0.91 (0.61–1.37)

1.00 (0.83–1.21)

0.96 (0.80–1.15)

  1. aAA african american, EA european american, Post-K post-katrina, REALM rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine, PPC patient provider communication, CCI charlson comorbidity index
  2. bFirth’s logistic regression models were used to reduce potential effects of low event rates
  3. cThe outcome variable was dichotomized as deceased or frail vs participant
  4. dThe outcome variable was dichotomized as lost to follow-up vs participant
  5. eThe outcome variable was dichotomized as refusal vs participant
  6. fSignificant p-values at Type I error 0.05 are bolded
  7. gReferent categories: Age: 40–59 age group, Race: EA, Study phase: Pre-K, Income: ≥$70,001, Education: high school, REALM score: high school, and Cancer aggressiveness: low