Scholarlink

Background <p>Low response rates are an increasing problem in population-based gambling surveys. Selective non-response may cause biased findings. Supporting information from administrative registers, whenever available for non-respondents can be utilized to estimate the effect of non-response to the gambling-related outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of non-response to the prevalences of two gambling measures: gambling participation and problem gambling.</p> Methods <p>Population-based Finnish Gambling Harms mixed-mode (online and postal) Survey 2016 was conducted among 18-year-olds or older in three geographical regions in Finland (response rate 36.2%). Weighted prevalences of gambling measures were calculated exploiting the respondents’ data (<i>n</i> = 7,153). The study sample (<i>N</i> = 19,741) was individually linked to socio-demographic data from Statistics Finland to obtain information on both respondents and non-respondents. Multiple imputation was utilized to calculate the adjusted prevalences of gambling measures by register-based variables: sex, age, residential area, family structure, household equivalised disposable income, highest education degree, employment status, and native language. Crude prevalences were compared against weighted and non-response adjusted prevalences.</p> Results <p>For gambling participation, there was no difference between the crude (81.9% [95% CI 81.0–82.8%]) and the weighted (83.2% [95% CI 82.3–84.0%]) prevalences (p-value 0.09), or between the crude and the non-response adjusted (82.3% [95% CI 81.6–83.0%]) prevalences (p-value 0.49). However, the non-response adjusted (2.8% [95% CI 2.4–3.3%]) prevalence of problem gambling was higher compared to the crude (1.9% [95% CI 1.6–2.3%]) prevalence (p-value 0.002), while there was no difference between the crude and the weighted (2.2% [95% CI 1.9–2.7%]) prevalences (p-value 0.26).</p> Conclusions <p>Non-response had an effect of problem gambling prevalence in a Finnish Gambling Harms Survey 2016. The presence of non-response bias should be checked when analysing population surveys. Using administrative register data enables unique opportunities to increase the reliability of the results and to adjust the estimates for non-response.</p> Trial registration <p>Clinical trial number: not applicable.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Using administrative register data for adjusting non-response bias in the finnish gambling harms survey

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月16日

查看全文
  • Jukka Kontto,
  • Hanna Tolonen,
  • Anne H. Salonen

摘要

Background

Low response rates are an increasing problem in population-based gambling surveys. Selective non-response may cause biased findings. Supporting information from administrative registers, whenever available for non-respondents can be utilized to estimate the effect of non-response to the gambling-related outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of non-response to the prevalences of two gambling measures: gambling participation and problem gambling.

Methods

Population-based Finnish Gambling Harms mixed-mode (online and postal) Survey 2016 was conducted among 18-year-olds or older in three geographical regions in Finland (response rate 36.2%). Weighted prevalences of gambling measures were calculated exploiting the respondents’ data (n = 7,153). The study sample (N = 19,741) was individually linked to socio-demographic data from Statistics Finland to obtain information on both respondents and non-respondents. Multiple imputation was utilized to calculate the adjusted prevalences of gambling measures by register-based variables: sex, age, residential area, family structure, household equivalised disposable income, highest education degree, employment status, and native language. Crude prevalences were compared against weighted and non-response adjusted prevalences.

Results

For gambling participation, there was no difference between the crude (81.9% [95% CI 81.0–82.8%]) and the weighted (83.2% [95% CI 82.3–84.0%]) prevalences (p-value 0.09), or between the crude and the non-response adjusted (82.3% [95% CI 81.6–83.0%]) prevalences (p-value 0.49). However, the non-response adjusted (2.8% [95% CI 2.4–3.3%]) prevalence of problem gambling was higher compared to the crude (1.9% [95% CI 1.6–2.3%]) prevalence (p-value 0.002), while there was no difference between the crude and the weighted (2.2% [95% CI 1.9–2.7%]) prevalences (p-value 0.26).

Conclusions

Non-response had an effect of problem gambling prevalence in a Finnish Gambling Harms Survey 2016. The presence of non-response bias should be checked when analysing population surveys. Using administrative register data enables unique opportunities to increase the reliability of the results and to adjust the estimates for non-response.

Trial registration

Clinical trial number: not applicable.