Skip to main content

Table 2 Analyses of predictors of complete loss to follow-up.

From: Predicting complete loss to follow-up after a health-education program: number of absences and face-to-face contact with a researcher

Predictor variable   Lost to follow-up n = 50 Not lost to follow-up n = 359 Odds ratio (95% confidence interval) Area under ROC curve, or sensitivity and specificity
Hypothesized predictors      
Number of absencesa Median (25%, 75%) 2.0 (0, 5) 0 (0, 1) 1.78 (1.49-2.12) 0.723
  95% CI 1 to 4 0 to 1   
Contactb Yes 18 188 0.51 (0.28-0.95) 0.64, 0.52
  No 32 171   
Other analyses c      
Aged Mean ± SD 42.5 ± 14.1 48.1 ± 14.0 0.97 (0.95-0.99) 0.623
  95% CI 38.6 to 46.4 46.6 to 49.5   
Sex Female 40 285 1.04 (0.50-2.17) 0.20, 0.79
  Male 10 74   
Schoolinge High 23 185 0.80 (0.44-1.44) 0.54, 0.52
  Low 27 173   
Marital statusf Together 21 194 0.61 (0.34-1.11) 0.58, 0.54
  Not together 29 164   
Self-efficacyg Mean ± SD 32.2 ± 12.5 32.2 ± 12.2 1.00 (0.98-1.02) 0.502
  95% CI 28.7 to 35.7 31.0 to 33.5   
> 3 diagnoses With 1 24 0.29 (0.04-2.15) 0.98, 0.07
  Without 49 335   
Allergic disease With 15 90 1.28 (0.67-2.45) 0.30, 0.75
  Without 35 269   
Connective tissue disease With 3 64 0.29 (0.09-0.98) 0.94, 0.18
  Without 47 295   
Diabetes With 6 59 0.69 (0.28-1.70) 0.88, 0.17
  Without 44 300   
Vascular disease With 10 55 1.38 (0.65-2.93) 0.20, 0.85
  Without 40 304   
Rheumatic disease With 4 43 0.64 (0.22-1.86) 0.92, 0.12
  Without 46 316   
Fibromyalgia syndrome With 5 27 1.37 (0.50-3.73) 0.10, 0.92
  Without 45 332   
Cardiovascular disease With 0 24 0h 1.00, 0.07
  Without 50 335   
Cancer With 2 21 0.67 (0.15-2.95) 0.96, 0.06
  Without 48 338   
Asthma With 3 18 1.21 (0.34-4.26) 0.06, 0.95
  Without 47 341   
Depression With 4 13 2.31 (0.72-7.40) 0.08, 0.96
  Without 46 346   
Pulmonary disease With 3 10 2.23 (0.59-8.39) 0.06, 0.97
  Without 47 349   
  1. For the number of absences, the table shows medians, 25th & 75th percentiles, and 95% confidence intervals.
  2. For the other two continuous variables, the table shows means ± SDs, 95% confidence intervals, and areas under ROC curves.
  3. For each categorical variable, the table shows numbers of people in each category, odds ratio and its 95% confidence interval, sensitivity, and specificity.
  4. a Number of absences from program sessions; minimum = 0, maximum = 6. Odds ratio from simple logistic regression.
  5. b No: did not have in-person contact with one of the researchers; yes: did have contact, once, at the time baseline data were collected.
  6. c Analyses of predictors studied previously or suggested during peer review.
  7. d Age in years. Odds ratio from simple logistic regression.
  8. e Low: high school or less; high: college or more.
  9. f Together: living together; not: all others
  10. g Score on a 0-to-60 scale measuring self-efficacy to manage symptoms; odds ratio from simple logistic regression.
  11. h Because no people with cardiovascular disease were completely lost to follow-up, there was complete separation in the "complete loss to follow-up" category. For a conservatively-biased estimate, changing the 0 to 1 and the 50 to 49 would yield an odds ratio of 0.29 (0.04-2.15).