University of Maryland, School of Public Health, Maryland Center for Health Equity and Department of Behavioral and Community Health, College Park, MD 20742, USA.
Contemp Clin Trials. 2013 Sep;36(1):61-7. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2013.05.014. Epub 2013 Jun 10.
Limited attention has been given to the optimal strategies for retaining racial and ethnic minorities within studies and during the follow-up period. High attrition limits the interpretation of results and reduces the ability to translate findings into successful interventions. This study examined the retention strategies used by researchers when retaining minorities in research studies. From May to August 2010, we conducted an online survey with researchers (principal investigators, research staff, and IRB members) and examined their use of seven commonly used retention strategies. The number and type of retention strategies used, how these strategies differ by researcher type, and other characteristics (e.g., funding) were explored. We identified three clusters of researchers: comprehensive retention strategy researchers - utilized the greatest number of retention strategies; moderate retention strategy researchers - utilized an average number of retention strategies; and limited retention strategy researchers - utilized the least number of retention strategies. The comprehensive and moderate retention strategy researchers were more likely than the limited retention strategy researchers to conduct health outcomes research, work with a community advisory board, hire minority staff, use steps at a higher rate to overcome retention barriers, develop new partnerships with the minority community, modify study materials for the minority population, and allow staff to work flexible schedules. This study is a novel effort to characterize researchers, without implying a value judgment, according to their use of specific retention strategies. It provides critical information for conducting future research to determine the effectiveness of using a combination of retention strategies.
人们对在研究过程中和随访期间保留少数民族的最佳策略关注有限。较高的失访率限制了对结果的解释,降低了将研究结果转化为成功干预措施的能力。本研究调查了研究人员在研究中保留少数民族时使用的保留策略。2010 年 5 月至 8 月,我们对研究人员(主要研究者、研究人员和 IRB 成员)进行了在线调查,并检查了他们使用的七种常见保留策略。研究人员使用的保留策略的数量和类型、这些策略如何因研究人员类型而异以及其他特征(例如,资金)进行了探讨。我们确定了三组研究人员:全面保留策略研究人员——使用了最多数量的保留策略;中等保留策略研究人员——使用了平均数量的保留策略;有限保留策略研究人员——使用了最少数量的保留策略。全面和中等保留策略研究人员比有限保留策略研究人员更有可能进行健康结果研究、与社区咨询委员会合作、雇佣少数民族工作人员、更频繁地采取措施克服保留障碍、与少数民族社区建立新的合作伙伴关系、为少数民族群体修改研究材料以及允许员工灵活安排工作时间。本研究是根据研究人员使用特定保留策略对其进行描述的新颖尝试,不带有任何价值判断。它为未来的研究提供了重要信息,以确定使用多种保留策略的有效性。