Nathan Solbak

Mr. Nathan Solbak


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
21 July 2016 in CMAJ Open
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PRPaula J. Robson
Paula J. Robson
NSNathan Solbak
Nathan Solbak
THTiffany R. Haig
Tiffany R. Haig
HWHeather K. Whelan
Heather K. Whelan
JVJennifer E. Vena
Jennifer E. Vena
CFChristine M. Friedenreich
Christine M. Friedenreich
Background: Prospective cohorts have the potential to support multifactorial, health-related research, particularly if they are drawn from the general population, incorporate active and passive follow-up and permission is obtained to allow access by researchers to data repositories. This paper describes Phase I of the Alberta's Tomorrow Project cohort, a broad-based research platform designed to support investigations into factors that influence cancer and chronic disease risk. Methods: Adults aged 35-69 years living in Alberta, Canada, with no previous cancer diagnosis other than nonmelanoma skin cancer were recruited to the project by telephone-based random digit dialling. Participants were enrolled if they returned a Health and Lifestyle Questionnaire. Past year diet and physical activity questionnaires were mailed 3 months after enrolment. Consent was sought for active follow-up and linkage with administrative databases. Depending on enrolment date, participants were invited to complete up to 2 follow-up questionnaires (2004 and 2008). Results: Between 2001 and 2009, 31 072 (39% men) participants (mean age 50.2 [± 9.2] yr) were enrolled and 99% consented to linkage with administrative databases. Participants reported a wide range of educational attainment and household income. Compared with provincial surveillance data from the Canadian Community Health Survey, Alberta's Tomorrow Project participants had higher body mass index, lower prevalence of smoking and similar distribution of chronic health conditions. Follow-up questionnaires were completed by 83% and 72% of participants in 2004 and 2008, respectively. Robust quality control measures resulted in low frequencies of missing data. Interpretation: Alberta's Tomorrow Project provides a robust platform, based on a prospective cohort design, to support research into risk factors for cancer and chronic disease.

31 January 2017 in Nutrients
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SKSharon Kirkpatrick
Sharon Kirkpatrick
AGAnne M. Gilsing
Anne M. Gilsing
EHErin Hobin
Erin Hobin
NSNathan Solbak
Nathan Solbak
AWAngela Wallace
Angela Wallace
HWHeather K. Whelan
Heather K. Whelan
With technological innovation, comprehensive dietary intake data can be collected in a wide range of studies and settings. The Automated Self-Administered 24-hour (ASA24) Dietary Assessment Tool is a web-based system that guides respondents through 24-h recalls. The purpose of this paper is to describe lessons learned from five studies that assessed the feasibility and validity of ASA24 for capturing recall data among several population subgroups in Canada. These studies were conducted within a childcare setting (preschool children with reporting by parents), in public schools (children in grades 5–8; aged 10–13 years), and with community-based samples drawn from existing cohorts of adults and older adults. Themes emerged across studies regarding receptivity to completing ASA24, user experiences with the interface, and practical considerations for different populations. Overall, we found high acceptance of ASA24 among these diverse samples. However, the ASA24 interface was not intuitive for some participants, particularly young children and older adults. As well, technological challenges were encountered. These observations underscore the importance of piloting protocols using online tools, as well as consideration of the potential need for tailored resources to support study participants. Lessons gleaned can inform the effective use of technology-enabled dietary assessment tools in research.

1 December 2013 in Osteoarthritis and Cartilage
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
BHB.J. Heard
B.J. Heard
NSNathan Solbak
Nathan Solbak
YAY. Achari
Y. Achari
MCM. Chung
M. Chung
DHD.A. Hart
D.A. Hart
CFC.B. Frank
C.B. Frank

22 February 2016 in Inflammation Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BHBryan J. Heard
Bryan J. Heard
NSNathan Solbak
Nathan Solbak
MCMay Chung
May Chung
YAYamini Achari
Yamini Achari
NSNigel G. Shrive
Nigel G. Shrive
David A. HartDavid A. Hart
David A. Hart

20 June 2015 in Inflammation Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
NSNathan Solbak
Nathan Solbak
BHBryan J. Heard
Bryan J. Heard
YAYamini Achari
Yamini Achari
MCMay Chung
May Chung
NSNigel G. Shrive
Nigel G. Shrive
David A. HartDavid A. Hart
David A. Hart

25 January 2018 in BMC Public Health
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NSNathan Solbak
Nathan Solbak
JXJian-Yi Xu
Jian-Yi Xu
JVJennifer Vena
Jennifer Vena
ARAla Al Rajabi
Ala Al Rajabi
SVSanaz Vaseghi
Sanaz Vaseghi
SMS Elizabeth McGregor
S Elizabeth McGregor
Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is an important modifiable behaviour for cancer control. Regular screening, following recommendations for the type, timing and frequency based on personal CRC risk, contributes to earlier detection and increases likelihood of successful treatment. To determine adherence to screening recommendations in a large provincial cohort of adults, participants in Alberta’s Tomorrow Project (n = 9641) were stratified based on increasing level of CRC risk: age (Age-only), family history of CRC (FamilyHx), personal history of bowel conditions (PersonalHx), or both (Family/PersonalHx) using self-reported information from questionnaires. Provincial and national guidelines for timing and frequency of screening tests were used to determine if participants were up-to-date based on their CRC risk. Screening status was compared between enrollment (2000–2006) and follow-up (2008) to determine screening pattern over time. The majority of participants (77%) fell into the average risk Age-only strata. Only a third of this strata were up-to-date for screening at baseline, but the proportion increased across the higher risk strata, with > 90% of the highest risk Family/PersonalHx strata up-to-date at baseline. There was also a lower proportion (< 25%) of the Age-only group who were regular screeners over time compared to the higher risk strata, though age, higher income and uptake of other screening tests (e.g. mammography) were associated with a greater likelihood of regular screening in multinomial logistic regression. The low (< 50%) adherence to regular CRC screening in average and moderate risk strata highlights the need to further explore barriers to uptake of screening across different risk profiles.