Department of Oncology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, United States.
Health Outcomes and Behavior Program, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, United States.
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Sep 2;26:e54450. doi: 10.2196/54450.
Research is needed to understand and address barriers to risk management for women at high (≥20% lifetime) risk for breast cancer, but recruiting this population for research studies is challenging.
This paper compares a variety of recruitment strategies used for a cross-sectional, observational study of high-risk women.
Eligible participants were assigned female at birth, aged 25-85 years, English-speaking, living in the United States, and at high risk for breast cancer as defined by the American College of Radiology. Individuals were excluded if they had a personal history of breast cancer, prior bilateral mastectomy, medical contraindications for magnetic resonance imaging, or were not up-to-date on screening mammography per American College of Radiology guidelines. Participants were recruited from August 2020 to January 2021 using the following mechanisms: targeted Facebook advertisements, Twitter posts, ResearchMatch (a web-based research recruitment database), community partner promotions, paper flyers, and community outreach events. Interested individuals were directed to a secure website with eligibility screening questions. Participants self-reported method of recruitment during the eligibility screening. For each recruitment strategy, we calculated the rate of eligible respondents and completed surveys, costs per eligible participant, and participant demographics.
We received 1566 unique responses to the eligibility screener. Participants most often reported recruitment via Facebook advertisements (724/1566, 46%) and ResearchMatch (646/1566, 41%). Community partner promotions resulted in the highest proportion of eligible respondents (24/46, 52%), while ResearchMatch had the lowest proportion of eligible respondents (73/646, 11%). Word of mouth was the most cost-effective recruitment strategy (US $4.66 per completed survey response) and paper flyers were the least cost-effective (US $1448.13 per completed survey response). The demographic characteristics of eligible respondents varied by recruitment strategy: Twitter posts and community outreach events resulted in the highest proportion of Hispanic or Latina women (1/4, 25% and 2/6, 33%, respectively), and community partner promotions resulted in the highest proportion of non-Hispanic Black women (4/24, 17%).
Although recruitment strategies varied in their yield of study participants, results overall support the feasibility of identifying and recruiting women at high risk for breast cancer outside of clinical settings. Researchers must balance the associated costs and participant yield of various recruitment strategies in planning future studies focused on high-risk women.
需要研究来了解和解决高风险（≥20%终身）乳腺癌女性的风险管理障碍，但招募这一人群进行研究具有挑战性。
本文比较了用于横断面观察性研究高风险女性的各种招募策略。
符合条件的参与者为女性，出生时为女性，年龄 25-85 岁，会说英语，居住在美国，且乳腺癌风险高，符合美国放射学院的定义。如果个人有乳腺癌病史、双侧乳房切除术、磁共振成像的医学禁忌症，或不符合美国放射学院指南规定的筛查乳房 X 光检查，则排除在外。参与者于 2020 年 8 月至 2021 年 1 月通过以下机制招募：有针对性的 Facebook 广告、Twitter 帖子、ResearchMatch（一个基于网络的研究招募数据库）、社区合作伙伴推广、纸质传单和社区外展活动。有兴趣的人被引导到一个带有资格筛选问题的安全网站。参与者在资格筛选期间报告了自己的招募方式。对于每种招募策略，我们计算了合格应答者和完成调查的比例、每位合格参与者的成本以及参与者的人口统计学特征。
我们收到了 1566 份符合条件的筛查器的唯一回复。参与者最常报告的招募方式是 Facebook 广告（724/1566，46%）和 ResearchMatch（646/1566，41%）。社区合作伙伴推广产生的合格应答者比例最高（24/46，52%），而 ResearchMatch 的合格应答者比例最低（73/646，11%）。口碑是最具成本效益的招募策略（每次完成调查回复的费用为 4.66 美元），而纸质传单则是最不具成本效益的（每次完成调查回复的费用为 1448.13 美元）。合格应答者的人口统计学特征因招募策略而异：Twitter 帖子和社区外展活动产生的西班牙裔或拉丁裔女性比例最高（分别为 4/4，25%和 2/6，33%），社区合作伙伴推广产生的非西班牙裔黑人女性比例最高（24/46，17%）。
尽管招募策略在研究参与者的产量上有所不同，但总体结果支持在临床环境之外确定和招募乳腺癌高风险女性的可行性。研究人员在规划未来专注于高风险女性的研究时，必须平衡各种招募策略的相关成本和参与者产量。
