National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Sep 24;12:147. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-147.
Various options exist for collecting biospecimens and biomarkers from cohort study participants, and these have important logistic, resource and scientific implications. Evidence on how different collection methods affect participation and data quality is lacking. This parallel-design randomised trial, the Link-Up Study, involved blood sample donation and other data collection among participants in an existing cohort study, The 45 and Up Study. It aimed to investigate the relation of fasting status, reminder letters and data collection site to response rates, data quality and biospecimen yield.
Individuals aged 45 and over participating in The 45 and Up Study and living ≤ 20 km from central Wagga Wagga, NSW (regional area) or ≤ 10 km from central Parramatta, NSW (urban area) (n=2340) were randomised, stratified by area of residence, to be invited to give a blood sample and additional data by attending either a clinic established specifically for the trial, with an appointment time ("dedicated clinic", n=1336) or an existing local commercial pathology centre (n=1004). Within dedicated clinic groups, participants were randomised into fasting (n=668) or non-fasting (n=668) and, at the Parramatta pathology centre site, reminder letter after two weeks (n=336) or no reminder (n=334).
Overall, 33% (762/2340) of invitees took part in the Link-Up Study; 41% (410/1002) among regional and 26% (352/1338) among urban-area residents (p<0.0001). At the dedicated clinics, response rates were 38% (257/668) not fasting and 38% fasting (257/668) (participation rate ratio (RR) =1.00, 95%CI 0.91-1.08, p=0.98). The response rate was 22% among individuals randomised to attend the Parramatta pathology centre without a reminder and 23% among those sent a reminder letter (RR=1.01, 0.93-1.09, p=0.74). In total, the response rate was 38% (514/1336) at the dedicated clinics and 25% (248/1004) at the pathology centres (RR=0.67, 0.56-0.78, p<0.01); measures of height, weight and systolic and diastolic blood pressure did not vary materially between these groups, nor did the median number of aliquots of plasma, buffy coat and red cells collected.
Among cohort study participants, response rates for an additional study involving biospecimen collection, but not data quality or average biospecimen yield, were considerably higher at dedicated clinics than at existing commercial pathology sites.
从队列研究参与者中收集生物样本和生物标志物有多种选择,这些选择具有重要的后勤、资源和科学意义。关于不同收集方法如何影响参与度和数据质量的证据尚缺乏。这项平行设计的随机试验,即 Link-Up 研究,涉及到现有队列研究——45 岁及以上研究参与者的血液样本捐赠和其他数据收集。其目的是研究禁食状态、提醒信和数据收集地点与反应率、数据质量和生物样本产量之间的关系。
年龄在 45 岁及以上、居住在新南威尔士州沃加沃加市中心 20 公里以内(区域)或新南威尔士州帕拉马塔市中心 10 公里以内(城市)的 45 岁及以上研究参与者(n=2340)被随机分为两组,按居住区域分层,受邀参加专门为该试验设立的诊所或现有的当地商业病理中心(n=1004)进行血液样本和其他数据采集。在专门诊所组内,参与者被随机分为禁食(n=668)或不禁食(n=668),在帕拉马塔病理中心,两周后发送提醒信(n=336)或不发送提醒信(n=334)。
总的来说,2340 名受邀者中有 33%(762/2340)参加了 Link-Up 研究;区域参与者的参与率为 41%(410/1002),城市参与者的参与率为 26%(352/1338)(p<0.0001)。在专门诊所,无禁食的反应率为 38%(257/668),禁食的反应率为 38%(257/668)(参与率比(RR)为 1.00,95%CI 0.91-1.08,p=0.98)。在未收到提醒的情况下随机分配到帕拉马塔病理中心的个体的反应率为 22%,收到提醒信的个体的反应率为 23%(RR=1.01,95%CI 0.93-1.09,p=0.74)。总的来说,专门诊所的反应率为 38%(514/1336),病理中心的反应率为 25%(248/1004)(RR=0.67,95%CI 0.56-0.78,p<0.01);这些组之间的身高、体重、收缩压和舒张压的测量值没有明显差异,收集的血浆、白细胞层和红细胞的中位数也没有明显差异。
在队列研究参与者中,专门诊所参与额外的生物样本收集研究的反应率明显高于现有的商业病理站点,但数据质量或平均生物样本产量没有明显差异。