MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413300028 · doi:10.2196/68038

Factors Affecting Nonresponse Among Female Participants in the Korea Nurses’ Health Study: Longitudinal Cohort Survey Study

2025· article· en· W4413300028 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Young Taek Kim, Chiyoung Cha, Gumhee Baek, Bohye Kim, Bo Song, Joong-Yeon Lim, Hyun‐Young Park

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintCohort studyEnvironmental healthMedicineCohortPsychologyGerontologyDemographySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The major drawback of a cohort study design is the loss to follow-up, which increases selection bias and threatens external validity, particularly in online surveys. It is important to identify factors beyond population or demographics that influence nonresponse rates in cohort studies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine the nonresponse rate and associated factors over a 10-year follow-up period among female participants in the Korea Nurses' Health Study using data from the initial and subsequent surveys. METHODS: The Korea Nurses' Health Study recruited 20,613 female nurses in 2013 using simple random sampling. The participants were followed up 10 times through 2022. We identified the demographic, work-related, survey-related, and psychological characteristics of nonresponding nurses during the 10-year follow-up and compared them with those who continued to participate. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and multivariate logistic regression models were used for the analysis. RESULTS: The nonresponse rate of the follow-up surveys from the 2nd to the 11th survey varied between 25.5% (5258/20,613; second survey) and 61.2% (12,620/20,613; sixth survey). The influence of age, education, and the usability of survey websites on nonresponse lasted up to the 11th survey. Nurses in their 20s were less likely to respond to the follow-up surveys than those in their 30s. Those who had an associate degree and neutral feelings about the usability of the survey websites were less likely to respond to the follow-up surveys than those who were satisfied with the initial survey. The influence of geographical region, hospital size, and psychological factors-including stress, fatigue, and sleep disturbance-was evident from the second to the sixth survey. CONCLUSIONS: When designing and recruiting female nurse participants for community-based cohort studies, researchers should consider the factors that influence nonresponse and adopt tailored strategies based on demographic characteristics. In addition, improving the usability of survey websites is recommended to reduce nonresponses at follow-up in cohort studies involving female participants. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-DOI: https://doi.org/10.4178/epih.e2024048.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.339
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicSurvey Methodology and NonresponseFrench-language works237,207