Cargando…

Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Participant retention strategies that minimise attrition in longitudinal cohort studies have evolved considerably in recent years. This study aimed to assess, via systematic review and meta-analysis, the effectiveness of both traditional strategies and contemporary innovations for retent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Teague, Samantha, Youssef, George J., Macdonald, Jacqui A., Sciberras, Emma, Shatte, Adrian, Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Matthew, Greenwood, Chris, McIntosh, Jennifer, Olsson, Craig A., Hutchinson, Delyse
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6258319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30477443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0586-7
_version_ 1783374472815837184
author Teague, Samantha
Youssef, George J.
Macdonald, Jacqui A.
Sciberras, Emma
Shatte, Adrian
Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Matthew
Greenwood, Chris
McIntosh, Jennifer
Olsson, Craig A.
Hutchinson, Delyse
author_facet Teague, Samantha
Youssef, George J.
Macdonald, Jacqui A.
Sciberras, Emma
Shatte, Adrian
Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Matthew
Greenwood, Chris
McIntosh, Jennifer
Olsson, Craig A.
Hutchinson, Delyse
author_sort Teague, Samantha
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Participant retention strategies that minimise attrition in longitudinal cohort studies have evolved considerably in recent years. This study aimed to assess, via systematic review and meta-analysis, the effectiveness of both traditional strategies and contemporary innovations for retention adopted by longitudinal cohort studies in the past decade. METHODS: Health research databases were searched for retention strategies used within longitudinal cohort studies published in the 10-years prior, with 143 eligible longitudinal cohort studies identified (141 articles; sample size range: 30 to 61,895). Details on retention strategies and rates, research designs, and participant demographics were extracted. Meta-analyses of retained proportions were performed to examine the association between cohort retention rate and individual and thematically grouped retention strategies. RESULTS: Results identified 95 retention strategies, broadly classed as either: barrier-reduction, community-building, follow-up/reminder, or tracing strategies. Forty-four of these strategies had not been identified in previous reviews. Meta-regressions indicated that studies using barrier-reduction strategies retained 10% more of their sample (95%CI [0.13 to 1.08]; p = .01); however, studies using follow-up/reminder strategies lost an additional 10% of their sample (95%CI [− 1.19 to − 0.21]; p = .02). The overall number of strategies employed was not associated with retention. CONCLUSIONS: Employing a larger number of retention strategies may not be associated with improved retention in longitudinal cohort studies, contrary to earlier narrative reviews. Results suggest that strategies that aim to reduce participant burden (e.g., flexibility in data collection methods) might be most effective in maximising cohort retention. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-018-0586-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6258319
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62583192018-11-29 Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis Teague, Samantha Youssef, George J. Macdonald, Jacqui A. Sciberras, Emma Shatte, Adrian Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Matthew Greenwood, Chris McIntosh, Jennifer Olsson, Craig A. Hutchinson, Delyse BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Participant retention strategies that minimise attrition in longitudinal cohort studies have evolved considerably in recent years. This study aimed to assess, via systematic review and meta-analysis, the effectiveness of both traditional strategies and contemporary innovations for retention adopted by longitudinal cohort studies in the past decade. METHODS: Health research databases were searched for retention strategies used within longitudinal cohort studies published in the 10-years prior, with 143 eligible longitudinal cohort studies identified (141 articles; sample size range: 30 to 61,895). Details on retention strategies and rates, research designs, and participant demographics were extracted. Meta-analyses of retained proportions were performed to examine the association between cohort retention rate and individual and thematically grouped retention strategies. RESULTS: Results identified 95 retention strategies, broadly classed as either: barrier-reduction, community-building, follow-up/reminder, or tracing strategies. Forty-four of these strategies had not been identified in previous reviews. Meta-regressions indicated that studies using barrier-reduction strategies retained 10% more of their sample (95%CI [0.13 to 1.08]; p = .01); however, studies using follow-up/reminder strategies lost an additional 10% of their sample (95%CI [− 1.19 to − 0.21]; p = .02). The overall number of strategies employed was not associated with retention. CONCLUSIONS: Employing a larger number of retention strategies may not be associated with improved retention in longitudinal cohort studies, contrary to earlier narrative reviews. Results suggest that strategies that aim to reduce participant burden (e.g., flexibility in data collection methods) might be most effective in maximising cohort retention. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-018-0586-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6258319/ /pubmed/30477443 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0586-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Teague, Samantha
Youssef, George J.
Macdonald, Jacqui A.
Sciberras, Emma
Shatte, Adrian
Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, Matthew
Greenwood, Chris
McIntosh, Jennifer
Olsson, Craig A.
Hutchinson, Delyse
Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6258319/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30477443
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0586-7
work_keys_str_mv AT teaguesamantha retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT youssefgeorgej retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT macdonaldjacquia retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sciberrasemma retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT shatteadrian retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fullertyszkiewiczmatthew retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT greenwoodchris retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mcintoshjennifer retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT olssoncraiga retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hutchinsondelyse retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT retentionstrategiesinlongitudinalcohortstudiesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis