Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011 Dec 15;8:137. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-137.
Most researchers who are conducting physical activity trials face difficulties in recruiting participants who are representative of the population or from specific population groups. Participants who are often the hardest to recruit are often those who stand to benefit most (the least active, from ethnic and other minority groups, from neighbourhoods with high levels of deprivation, or have poor health). The aim of our study was to conduct a systematic review of published literature of walking interventions, in order to identify the impact, characteristics, and differential effects of recruitment strategies among particular population groups.
We conducted standard searches for studies from four sources, (i) electronic literature databases and websites, (ii) grey literature from internet sources, (iii) contact with experts to identify additional "grey" and other literature, and (iv) snowballing from reference lists of retrieved articles. Included studies were randomised controlled trials, controlled before-and-after experimental or observational qualitative studies, examining the effects of an intervention to encourage people to walk independently or in a group setting, and detailing methods of recruitment.
Forty seven studies met the inclusion criteria. The overall quality of the descriptions of recruitment in the studies was poor with little detail reported on who undertook recruitment, or how long was spent planning/preparing and implementing the recruitment phase. Recruitment was conducted at locations that either matched where the intervention was delivered, or where the potential participants were asked to attend for the screening and signing up process. We identified a lack of conceptual clarity about the recruitment process and no standard metric to evaluate the effectiveness of recruitment.
Recruitment concepts, methods, and reporting in walking intervention trials are poorly developed, adding to other limitations in the literature, such as limited generalisability. The lack of understanding of optimal and equitable recruitment strategies evident from this review limits the impact of interventions to promote walking to particular social groups. To improve the delivery of walking interventions to groups which can benefit most, specific attention to developing and evaluating targeted recruitment approaches is recommended.
大多数进行身体活动试验的研究人员在招募具有代表性的人群或特定人群的参与者方面都面临困难。通常最难招募的参与者往往是那些最受益的人(最不活跃的人、来自少数民族群体、来自贫困程度较高的社区、或健康状况较差的人)。我们的研究目的是对已发表的步行干预文献进行系统综述,以确定在特定人群中招募策略的影响、特征和差异效果。
我们从四个来源进行了标准搜索(i)电子文献数据库和网站、(ii)互联网来源的灰色文献、(iii)与专家联系以确定额外的“灰色”和其他文献、以及(iv)从检索文章的参考文献中进行滚雪球式搜索。纳入的研究是随机对照试验、对照前后的实验或观察性定性研究,检验鼓励人们独立或集体行走的干预措施的效果,并详细描述招募方法。
47 项研究符合纳入标准。研究中对招募的描述总体质量较差,很少详细报告谁进行了招募,或者花了多长时间计划/准备和实施招募阶段。招募是在与干预措施交付地点相匹配的地点进行的,或者在潜在参与者被要求参加筛选和注册过程的地点进行的。我们发现,对招募过程缺乏概念上的清晰认识,也没有评估招募效果的标准指标。
步行干预试验中招募的概念、方法和报告都不发达,这增加了文献中的其他局限性,例如推广性有限。从本次综述中可以明显看出,对最佳和公平的招募策略缺乏了解,这限制了促进特定社会群体参与步行的干预措施的效果。为了向最能受益的人群提供更好的步行干预措施,建议特别关注制定和评估有针对性的招募方法。