Cargando…

A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies are of aetiological and public health relevance but can be undermined by attrition. The aim of this paper was to identify effective retention strategies to increase participation in population-based cohort studies. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature to iden...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Booker, Cara L, Harding, Seeromanie, Benzeval, Michaela
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3103452/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21504610
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-249
_version_ 1782204518295928832
author Booker, Cara L
Harding, Seeromanie
Benzeval, Michaela
author_facet Booker, Cara L
Harding, Seeromanie
Benzeval, Michaela
author_sort Booker, Cara L
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies are of aetiological and public health relevance but can be undermined by attrition. The aim of this paper was to identify effective retention strategies to increase participation in population-based cohort studies. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature to identify prospective population-based cohort studies with health outcomes in which retention strategies had been evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies published up to January 2011 were included. Eleven of which were randomized controlled trials of retention strategies (RCT). Fifty-seven percent of the studies were postal, 21% in-person, 14% telephone and 7% had mixed data collection methods. A total of 45 different retention strategies were used, categorised as 1) incentives, 2) reminder methods, repeat visits or repeat questionnaires, alternative modes of data collection or 3) other methods. Incentives were associated with an increase in retention rates, which improved with greater incentive value. Whether cash was the most effective incentive was not clear from studies that compared cash and gifts of similar value. The average increase in retention rate was 12% for reminder letters, 5% for reminder calls and 12% for repeat questionnaires. Ten studies used alternative data collection methods, mainly as a last resort. All postal studies offered telephone interviews to non-responders, which increased retention rates by 3%. Studies that used face-to-face interviews increased their retention rates by 24% by offering alternative locations and modes of data collection. CONCLUSIONS: Incentives boosted retention rates in prospective cohort studies. Other methods appeared to have a beneficial effect but there was a general lack of a systematic approach to their evaluation.
format Text
id pubmed-3103452
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31034522011-05-28 A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies Booker, Cara L Harding, Seeromanie Benzeval, Michaela BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: Longitudinal studies are of aetiological and public health relevance but can be undermined by attrition. The aim of this paper was to identify effective retention strategies to increase participation in population-based cohort studies. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature to identify prospective population-based cohort studies with health outcomes in which retention strategies had been evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies published up to January 2011 were included. Eleven of which were randomized controlled trials of retention strategies (RCT). Fifty-seven percent of the studies were postal, 21% in-person, 14% telephone and 7% had mixed data collection methods. A total of 45 different retention strategies were used, categorised as 1) incentives, 2) reminder methods, repeat visits or repeat questionnaires, alternative modes of data collection or 3) other methods. Incentives were associated with an increase in retention rates, which improved with greater incentive value. Whether cash was the most effective incentive was not clear from studies that compared cash and gifts of similar value. The average increase in retention rate was 12% for reminder letters, 5% for reminder calls and 12% for repeat questionnaires. Ten studies used alternative data collection methods, mainly as a last resort. All postal studies offered telephone interviews to non-responders, which increased retention rates by 3%. Studies that used face-to-face interviews increased their retention rates by 24% by offering alternative locations and modes of data collection. CONCLUSIONS: Incentives boosted retention rates in prospective cohort studies. Other methods appeared to have a beneficial effect but there was a general lack of a systematic approach to their evaluation. BioMed Central 2011-04-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3103452/ /pubmed/21504610 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-249 Text en Copyright ©2011 Booker et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Booker, Cara L
Harding, Seeromanie
Benzeval, Michaela
A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies
title A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies
title_full A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies
title_fullStr A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies
title_short A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies
title_sort systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3103452/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21504610
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-249
work_keys_str_mv AT bookercaral asystematicreviewoftheeffectofretentionmethodsinpopulationbasedcohortstudies
AT hardingseeromanie asystematicreviewoftheeffectofretentionmethodsinpopulationbasedcohortstudies
AT benzevalmichaela asystematicreviewoftheeffectofretentionmethodsinpopulationbasedcohortstudies
AT bookercaral systematicreviewoftheeffectofretentionmethodsinpopulationbasedcohortstudies
AT hardingseeromanie systematicreviewoftheeffectofretentionmethodsinpopulationbasedcohortstudies
AT benzevalmichaela systematicreviewoftheeffectofretentionmethodsinpopulationbasedcohortstudies