The healthy men study: design and recruitment considerations for environmental epidemiologic studies in male reproductive health
Objective
To describe study design, conduct and response, and participant characteristics.
Design
Prospective cohort study.
Setting
Participants were male partners of women who were enrolled in a community-based prospective cohort study of drinking water disinfection by-products and pregnancy health.
Patient(s)
Two hundred thirty presumed fertile men recruited from 3 study sites in the United States.
Intervention(s)
Men completed a telephone interview about demographics, health history, and exposures and provided a semen sample that was express mailed to the study laboratory.
Main Outcome Measure(s)
Response and participation rates, participant demographics, and lifestyle exposures.
Result(s)
We obtained a high participation rate (84%) among men who were located, but a low overall response rate (25%). Participants were more likely to be white, more highly educated, be married, and have a higher household income than the underlying study cohort.
Conclusion(s)
Our multisite study design may be applicable to the study of community environmental factors and reproductive health of men. Our design was efficient in that men from geographically disparate sites could be recruited, a semen sample was collected at home, and a telephone interview was conducted from a central study site. Despite these design features, the low response rates may suggest selection bias that can be addressed partially in the analysis.
Key Words: Male, semen, epidemiology, environmental exposure, sperm, water pollutants
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Disclaimer: Although the research described in this article has been supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, it has not been subjected to Agency review and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency, and no official endorsement should be inferred. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.Supported in part by grants from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (R-82932701) and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (P30ES10126).
PII: S0015-0282(06)04027-1
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.07.1517
© 2007 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

