Suppr超能文献

在研究中,哪种联系方法最适合招募参与者:给医疗保健研究人员的经验教训?

What method of contact works best for recruiting participants in a study: lessons for health care researchers?

作者信息

Iqbal Romania, Haroon Ali, Jabbar Abdul, Babar Neelofar, Qureshi Rahat

机构信息

Departments of Medicine, Aga Khan University, Karachi, Pakistan.

出版信息

J Pak Med Assoc. 2012 Dec;62(12):1293-7.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the various recruitment strategies used by medical researchers and their response rates.

METHODS

The observational study, part of a larger retrospective cohort, was done at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan, from May 2008-December 2010, covering a period from 1999 to 2005. We used a multi-mode contact approach for including participants in the study. This comprised an invitational letter that described the study sent along with a mail-back, postage-paid envelope and multiple phone calls for recruitment of participants. The response to each mode was noted and described as frequency and percentage.

RESULTS

There were 1335 participants eligible for recruitment in the study. Of them, 1247 (93.4%) were sent mailouts to which only 84 (6.7%) responded. Besides, 1133 participants,whose phone numbers were available, were called. Overall, the number of people that we were able to contact was low. The response to postage paid mail was very poor whereas the majority of participants were contacted via phone calls. Out of such participants, 257 (19.25%) agreed to participate at the very first call and our results suggest that more than three calls made very little contribution to the consent rate.

CONCLUSION

Recruiting subjects from contact information available in the medical records may not be the best method. Multiple and innovative approaches are required for approaching potential participants and requesting them to participate in a study.

摘要

目的

评估医学研究人员使用的各种招募策略及其回应率。

方法

这项观察性研究是一项更大规模回顾性队列研究的一部分,于2008年5月至2010年12月在巴基斯坦卡拉奇的阿迦汗大学医院进行,涵盖1999年至2005年期间。我们采用多模式联系方法将参与者纳入研究。这包括一封描述研究的邀请信,随信附上回邮已付邮资的信封,并多次致电招募参与者。记录每种模式的回应情况,并以频率和百分比进行描述。

结果

有1335名参与者符合该研究的招募条件。其中,1247名(93.4%)收到了邮件通知,只有84名(6.7%)做出了回应。此外,1133名有电话号码的参与者接到了电话。总体而言,我们能够联系到的人数较少。已付邮资邮件的回应非常差,而大多数参与者是通过电话联系的。在这些参与者中,257名(19.25%)在首次致电时就同意参与,我们的结果表明,超过三次致电对同意率的贡献很小。

结论

从病历中可用的联系信息招募受试者可能不是最佳方法。需要多种创新方法来接触潜在参与者并请求他们参与研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验