Cargando…

EHR phenotyping for research recruitment: Researcher, IRB, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients

INTRODUCTION: Failure to achieve accrual goals is a common problem in health-related research. Electronic health records represent a promising resource, offering the ability to identify a precisely defined cohort of patients who meet inclusion/exclusion criteria. However, challenges associated with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beskow, Laura M., Brelsford, Kathleen M., Hammack-Aviran, Catherine M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8057488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33948255
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.524
_version_ 1783680848004907008
author Beskow, Laura M.
Brelsford, Kathleen M.
Hammack-Aviran, Catherine M.
author_facet Beskow, Laura M.
Brelsford, Kathleen M.
Hammack-Aviran, Catherine M.
author_sort Beskow, Laura M.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Failure to achieve accrual goals is a common problem in health-related research. Electronic health records represent a promising resource, offering the ability to identify a precisely defined cohort of patients who meet inclusion/exclusion criteria. However, challenges associated with the recruitment process remain and institutional policies vary. METHODS: We interviewed researchers, institutional review board chairs, and primary care physicians in North Carolina and Tennessee. Questions focused on strategies for initiating contact with potentially eligible patients, as well as recruitment letters asking recipients to opt in versus opt out of further communication. RESULTS: When we asked about initiating contact with prospective participants, qualitative themes included trust, credibility, and established relationships; research efficiency and validity; privacy and autonomy; the intersection between research and clinical care; and disruption to physician–researcher and physician–patient relationships. All interviewees said it was acceptable for researchers to contact patients through their physicians; most said it was acceptable for researchers to contact patients directly. Over half chose contact through physicians as more appropriate. Regarding recruitment letters, qualitative themes included the quality of the participant pool; privacy and control; research efficiency and representativeness; and patients’ opportunity to make their own decisions. All interviewees said asking recipients to opt in to further communication was acceptable; nearly all said opt out was acceptable. Similar proportions chose each approach as more appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing these results to our previous research with patients reveals potential differences in stakeholder perspectives. We offer suggestions for developing balanced approaches that respect patients and facilitate the advancement of science.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8057488
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80574882021-05-03 EHR phenotyping for research recruitment: Researcher, IRB, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients Beskow, Laura M. Brelsford, Kathleen M. Hammack-Aviran, Catherine M. J Clin Transl Sci Research Article INTRODUCTION: Failure to achieve accrual goals is a common problem in health-related research. Electronic health records represent a promising resource, offering the ability to identify a precisely defined cohort of patients who meet inclusion/exclusion criteria. However, challenges associated with the recruitment process remain and institutional policies vary. METHODS: We interviewed researchers, institutional review board chairs, and primary care physicians in North Carolina and Tennessee. Questions focused on strategies for initiating contact with potentially eligible patients, as well as recruitment letters asking recipients to opt in versus opt out of further communication. RESULTS: When we asked about initiating contact with prospective participants, qualitative themes included trust, credibility, and established relationships; research efficiency and validity; privacy and autonomy; the intersection between research and clinical care; and disruption to physician–researcher and physician–patient relationships. All interviewees said it was acceptable for researchers to contact patients through their physicians; most said it was acceptable for researchers to contact patients directly. Over half chose contact through physicians as more appropriate. Regarding recruitment letters, qualitative themes included the quality of the participant pool; privacy and control; research efficiency and representativeness; and patients’ opportunity to make their own decisions. All interviewees said asking recipients to opt in to further communication was acceptable; nearly all said opt out was acceptable. Similar proportions chose each approach as more appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Comparing these results to our previous research with patients reveals potential differences in stakeholder perspectives. We offer suggestions for developing balanced approaches that respect patients and facilitate the advancement of science. Cambridge University Press 2020-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8057488/ /pubmed/33948255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.524 Text en © The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
spellingShingle Research Article
Beskow, Laura M.
Brelsford, Kathleen M.
Hammack-Aviran, Catherine M.
EHR phenotyping for research recruitment: Researcher, IRB, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients
title EHR phenotyping for research recruitment: Researcher, IRB, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients
title_full EHR phenotyping for research recruitment: Researcher, IRB, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients
title_fullStr EHR phenotyping for research recruitment: Researcher, IRB, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients
title_full_unstemmed EHR phenotyping for research recruitment: Researcher, IRB, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients
title_short EHR phenotyping for research recruitment: Researcher, IRB, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients
title_sort ehr phenotyping for research recruitment: researcher, irb, and physician perspectives on approaches to contacting patients
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8057488/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33948255
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.524
work_keys_str_mv AT beskowlauram ehrphenotypingforresearchrecruitmentresearcherirbandphysicianperspectivesonapproachestocontactingpatients
AT brelsfordkathleenm ehrphenotypingforresearchrecruitmentresearcherirbandphysicianperspectivesonapproachestocontactingpatients
AT hammackavirancatherinem ehrphenotypingforresearchrecruitmentresearcherirbandphysicianperspectivesonapproachestocontactingpatients