Background: Population-based estimates of biological family size can be useful for planning genetic studies, assessing how distributions of relatives affect disease associations with family history and estimating prevalence of potential family support. Methods: Mean family size per person is estimated from a population-based telephone survey (n = 1,019). Results: After multivariate adjustment for demographic variables, older and non-White respondents reported greater mean numbers of total, first- and second-degree relatives. Females reported more total and first-degree relatives, while less educated respondents reported more second-degree relatives. Conclusions: Demographic differences in family size have implications for genetic research. Therefore, periodic collection of family structure data in representative populations would be useful.

Keywords:
First- and second-degree relatives, Pedigree size, Telephone surveys
1.
Thomas DC: Design of gene characterization studies: an overview. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1999;26:17–23.
2.
Khoury MJ, Flanders WD: Bias in using family history as a risk factor in case-control studies of disease. Epidemiology 1995;6:511–519.
3.
Yang Q, Khoury MJ, Rodriguez C, Calle EE, Tatham LM, Flanders WD: Family history score as a predictor of breast cancer mortality: prospective data from the cancer prevention study II, United States, 1981–1991. Am J Epidemiol 1998;147:652–665.
4.
George VT, Elston RC: Ascertainment – an overview of the classic segregation analysis model for independent sibships. Biom J 1991;33:741–753.
5.
Day LH: Limits and possibilities relating to family structure and care of the aged in populations with unprecedentedly low fertility. J Aust Popul Assoc 1988;5:178–187.
6.
Baronet AM: Factors associated with caregiver burden in mental illness: a critical review of the research literature. Clin Psychol Rev 1999;19:819–841.
7.
Czaja RF, Snowden CB, Casady RJ: Reporting bias and sampling errors in a survey of a rare population using multiplicity counting rules. J Am Stat Assoc 1986;86:411–419.
8.
Skolnick M: The Utah Genealogical Database: a resource for genetic epidemiology; in Cairns J, Lyons JL, Skolnick M (eds): Cancer Incidence in Defined Populations. Cold Spring Harbor, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1980, pp 285–296.
9.
Sweet JA, Bumpass LL: The National Survey of Familes and Households – Waves 1, 2, and 3: Data Description and Documentation. Madison, Center for Demography and Ecology, University of Wisconsin – Madison, 2002. http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/nsfh/home.htm.
10.
National Interview Survey (NHIS). Hyattsville, National Center for Health Statistics, 2007. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/major/nhis/quest_data_related_1997_forward.htm (accessed July 10, 2007).
11.
Levy PS, Lemeshow S: Sampling of Populations: Methods and Applications, ed 3. New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1999, p 463.
12.
Council of American Survey Organizations: On the definition of response rates. New York, Council of American Survey Organizations, 1982.
13.
SAS Institute: SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Version 8.2. Cary, SAS Publishing, 2001.
14.
Research Triangle Institute: SUDAAN Language Manual, Release 9.0. Research Triangle Park, Research Triangle Institute, 2004.
15.
Rust KF, Rao JNK: Variance estimation for complex surveys using replication techniques. Stat Methods Med Res 1996;5:283–310.
16.
Korn EL, Graubard BI: Analysis of Health Surveys. New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1999, p 93.
17.
Fields J: America’s families and living arrangements: 2003. Current Population Reports. Washington, US Census Bureau, 2003, p20–533. http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/p20-553.pdf (table A-1).
18.
Pinsky PF, Kramer BS, Reding D, Buys S: Reported family history of cancer in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial. Am J Epidemiol 2003;157:792–799.
19.
Glanz K, Grove J, Le Marchand L, Gotay C: Underreporting of family history of colon cancer: correlates and implications. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999;8:635–639.
20.
Sudman S, Sirken MG, Cowan CD: Sampling rare and elusive populations. Science 1988;240:991–996.
© 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel
2008
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.