Cargando…

Retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting

BACKGROUND: Effective strategies for participant retention are critical in health research to ensure validity, generalizability and efficient use of resources. Yet standardized guidelines for planning and reporting on retention efforts have been lacking. As with randomized controlled trial (RCT) and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Catherine, Nicole L. A., Lever, Rosemary, Marcellus, Lenora, Tallon, Corinne, Sheehan, Debbie, MacMillan, Harriet, Gonzalez, Andrea, Jack, Susan M., Waddell, Charlotte
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7216482/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32393334
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04328-9
_version_ 1783532419301769216
author Catherine, Nicole L. A.
Lever, Rosemary
Marcellus, Lenora
Tallon, Corinne
Sheehan, Debbie
MacMillan, Harriet
Gonzalez, Andrea
Jack, Susan M.
Waddell, Charlotte
author_facet Catherine, Nicole L. A.
Lever, Rosemary
Marcellus, Lenora
Tallon, Corinne
Sheehan, Debbie
MacMillan, Harriet
Gonzalez, Andrea
Jack, Susan M.
Waddell, Charlotte
author_sort Catherine, Nicole L. A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Effective strategies for participant retention are critical in health research to ensure validity, generalizability and efficient use of resources. Yet standardized guidelines for planning and reporting on retention efforts have been lacking. As with randomized controlled trial (RCT) and systematic review (SR) protocols, retention protocols are an opportunity to improve transparency and rigor. An RCT being conducted in British Columbia (BC), Canada provides a case example for developing a priori retention frameworks for use in protocol planning and reporting. METHODS: The BC Healthy Connections Project RCT is examining the effectiveness of a nurse home-visiting program in improving child and maternal outcomes compared with existing services. Participants (N = 739) were girls and young women preparing to parent for the first time and experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. Quantitative data were collected upon trial entry during pregnancy and during five follow-up interviews until participants’ children reached age 2 years. A framework was developed to guide retention of this study population throughout the RCT. We reviewed relevant literature and mapped essential retention activities across the study planning, recruitment and maintenance phases. Interview completion rates were tracked. RESULTS: Results from 3302 follow-up interviews (in-person/telephone) conducted over 4 years indicate high completion rates: 90% (n = 667) at 34 weeks gestation; and 91% (n = 676), 85% (n = 626), 80% (n = 594) and 83% (n = 613) at 2, 10, 18 and 24 months postpartum, respectively. Almost all participants (99%, n = 732) provided ongoing consent to access administrative health data. These results provide preliminary data on the success of the framework. CONCLUSIONS: Our retention results are encouraging given that participants were experiencing considerable socioeconomic disadvantage. Standardized retention planning and reporting may therefore be feasible for health research in general, using the framework we have developed. Use of standardized retention protocols should be encouraged in research to promote consistency across diverse studies, as now happens with RCT and SR protocols. Beyond this, successful retention approaches may help inform health policy-makers and practitioners who also need to better reach, engage and retain underserved populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01672060. Registered on 24 August 2012.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7216482
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72164822020-05-18 Retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting Catherine, Nicole L. A. Lever, Rosemary Marcellus, Lenora Tallon, Corinne Sheehan, Debbie MacMillan, Harriet Gonzalez, Andrea Jack, Susan M. Waddell, Charlotte Trials Research BACKGROUND: Effective strategies for participant retention are critical in health research to ensure validity, generalizability and efficient use of resources. Yet standardized guidelines for planning and reporting on retention efforts have been lacking. As with randomized controlled trial (RCT) and systematic review (SR) protocols, retention protocols are an opportunity to improve transparency and rigor. An RCT being conducted in British Columbia (BC), Canada provides a case example for developing a priori retention frameworks for use in protocol planning and reporting. METHODS: The BC Healthy Connections Project RCT is examining the effectiveness of a nurse home-visiting program in improving child and maternal outcomes compared with existing services. Participants (N = 739) were girls and young women preparing to parent for the first time and experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. Quantitative data were collected upon trial entry during pregnancy and during five follow-up interviews until participants’ children reached age 2 years. A framework was developed to guide retention of this study population throughout the RCT. We reviewed relevant literature and mapped essential retention activities across the study planning, recruitment and maintenance phases. Interview completion rates were tracked. RESULTS: Results from 3302 follow-up interviews (in-person/telephone) conducted over 4 years indicate high completion rates: 90% (n = 667) at 34 weeks gestation; and 91% (n = 676), 85% (n = 626), 80% (n = 594) and 83% (n = 613) at 2, 10, 18 and 24 months postpartum, respectively. Almost all participants (99%, n = 732) provided ongoing consent to access administrative health data. These results provide preliminary data on the success of the framework. CONCLUSIONS: Our retention results are encouraging given that participants were experiencing considerable socioeconomic disadvantage. Standardized retention planning and reporting may therefore be feasible for health research in general, using the framework we have developed. Use of standardized retention protocols should be encouraged in research to promote consistency across diverse studies, as now happens with RCT and SR protocols. Beyond this, successful retention approaches may help inform health policy-makers and practitioners who also need to better reach, engage and retain underserved populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01672060. Registered on 24 August 2012. BioMed Central 2020-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7216482/ /pubmed/32393334 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04328-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Catherine, Nicole L. A.
Lever, Rosemary
Marcellus, Lenora
Tallon, Corinne
Sheehan, Debbie
MacMillan, Harriet
Gonzalez, Andrea
Jack, Susan M.
Waddell, Charlotte
Retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting
title Retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting
title_full Retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting
title_fullStr Retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting
title_full_unstemmed Retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting
title_short Retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting
title_sort retaining participants in community-based health research: a case example on standardized planning and reporting
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7216482/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32393334
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04328-9
work_keys_str_mv AT catherinenicolela retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting
AT leverrosemary retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting
AT marcelluslenora retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting
AT talloncorinne retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting
AT sheehandebbie retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting
AT macmillanharriet retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting
AT gonzalezandrea retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting
AT jacksusanm retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting
AT waddellcharlotte retainingparticipantsincommunitybasedhealthresearchacaseexampleonstandardizedplanningandreporting