The SELMA Study: A Birth Cohort Study in Sweden Following More Than 2000 Mother-Child Pairs
The SELMA Study: A Birth Cohort Study in Sweden Following More Than 2000 Mother-Child Pairs
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1365-3016.2012.01314.x
复制
发表时间：
2012-09-01
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Janson, Staffan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bornehag, Carl-Gustaf;Moniruzzaman, Syed;Janson, Staffan
背景资料：本文介绍了瑞典SELMA研究的背景、目的和研究设计，该研究旨在调查妊娠期和婴儿期早期暴露于环境因素的重要性，主要关注内分泌干扰物对后代多种慢性疾病/病症的影响。方法：以妊娠第10周的妇女为研究对象，建立队列研究。收集了孕妇和儿童的血液和尿液以及怀孕和婴儿期家庭环境中的空气和灰尘。调查表用于收集生活方式、社会经济地位、生活条件、饮食和病史等信息。结果：在8394名报告的孕妇中，6658名被邀请参加研究。在被邀请的妇女中，2 582人（39%）同意参加。在4076名（61%）非参与者中，2091名妇女被邀请参加非答复问卷调查，以检查可能的选择偏见。我们发现，与非参与者组相比，在已建立的队列中存在自我选择偏倚，例如，参与的家庭吸烟较少（14%对19%），在家族中有更频繁的哮喘和过敏症状（58%对38%），母亲受教育程度较高（51%对36%），更多的人住在独户住宅（67%对60%）。结论：这些结果表明，参与的家庭并不完全代表研究人群，因此，在这个人群中的暴露。然而，没有明显的理由表明这种选择偏差会对环境风险因素的识别产生影响。
Background: This paper describes the background, aim and study design for the Swedish SELMA study that aimed to investigate the importance of early life exposure during pregnancy and infancy to environmental factors with a major focus on endocrine disrupting chemicals for multiple chronic diseases/disorders in offspring. Methods: The cohort was established by recruiting women in the 10th week of pregnancy. Blood and urine from the pregnant women and the child and air and dust from home environment from pregnancy and infancy period have been collected. Questionnaires were used to collect information on life styles, socio-economic status, living conditions, diet and medical history. Results: Of the 8394 reported pregnant women, 6658 were invited to participate in the study. Among the invited women, 2582 (39%) agreed to participate. Of the 4076 (61%) non-participants, 2091 women were invited to a non-respondent questionnaire in order to examine possible selection bias. We found a self-selection bias in the established cohort when compared with the non-participant group, e.g. participating families did smoke less (14% vs. 19%), had more frequent asthma and allergy symptoms in the family (58% vs. 38%), as well as higher education among the mothers (51% vs. 36%) and more often lived in single-family houses (67% vs. 60%). Conclusions: These findings indicate that the participating families do not fully represent the study population and thus, the exposure in this population. However, there is no obvious reason that this selection bias will have an impact on identification of environmental risk factors.