Mode of conception of twin pregnancies: Willingness to reply to survey items and comparison of survey data to hospital records.

C.E.M. van Beijsterveldt, C. Hoekstra, R. Schats, GW Montgomery, G. Willemsen, D.I. Boomsma

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

205 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Based on results from a survey study in a sample of Australian parents of twins, Raj and Morley (2007) reported that questions concerning the mode of conception of twins may be offensive to parents. We looked at the willingness to reply to questions about mode of conception of twin pregnancies in a large survey study that was completed by 20, 150 mothers of twins from the Netherlands Twin Registry. Data collection took place in 2005/2006. The amount of missing data was examined and by using data from earlier survey studies, responders and nonresponders were compared with respect to their answers to questions on assisted reproduction techniques. In addition, we assessed the reliability of the question on mode of conception by comparing the survey data with hospital records in a subsample of 80 mothers of twins. We found no indication that mothers of twins were not prepared to reply to questions on mode of conception. Only a small number of mothers did not fill in the question on mode of conception (0.8%). Also, the use of artificial fertility techniques did not differ between mothers who returned and mothers who did not return the 2005/2006 survey. The comparison of the survey data with the hospital records showed that mothers can accurately report on the mode of conception of their twins.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)349-351
JournalTwin Research and Human Genetics
Volume11
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Cohort Studies

  • Netherlands Twin Register (NTR)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Mode of conception of twin pregnancies: Willingness to reply to survey items and comparison of survey data to hospital records.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this