Comparison of sample characteristics in two pregnancy cohorts: community-based versus population-based recruitment methods

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Suzanne C Tough³  Gerald F Giesbrecht³  Bonnie J Kaplan³  Sheila W McDonald¹  Brenda MY Leung² 

[1] Child Development Centre, Alberta Children’s Hospital, Calgary, AB, Canada;Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada;Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

关键词: Participant characteristics;    Cohort studies;    Population-based;    Community-based;    Recruitment strategy;   

Others  :  866548
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2288-13-149

 received in 2013-02-27, accepted in 2013-12-04,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

One of the biggest challenges for population health studies is the recruitment of participants. Questions that investigators have asked are “who volunteers for studies?” and “does recruitment method influence characteristics of the samples?” The purpose of this paper was to compare sample characteristics of two unrelated pregnancy cohort studies taking place in the same city, in the same time period, that employed different recruitment strategies, as well as to compare the characteristics of both cohorts to provincial and national statistics derived from the Maternity Experiences Survey (MES).

Methods

One pregnancy cohort used community-based recruitment (e.g. posters, pamphlets, interviews with community media and face-to-face recruitment in maternity clinics); the second pregnancy cohort used both community-based and population-based (a centralized system identifying pregnant women undergoing routine laboratory testing) strategies.

Results

The pregnancy cohorts differed in education, income, ethnicity, and foreign-born status (p < 0.01), but were similar for maternal age, BMI, and marital status. Compared to the MES, the lowest age, education, and income groups were under-represented, and the cohorts were more likely to be primiparous.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that non-stratified strategies for recruitment of participants will not necessarily result in samples that reflect the general population, but can reflect the target population of interest. Attracting and retaining young, low resource women into urban studies about pregnancy may require alternate and innovative approaches.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Leung et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Webster GM, Teschke K, Janssen PA: Recruitment of healthy first-trimester pregnant women: lessons from the Chemicals, Health & Pregnancy Study (CHirP). Matern Child Health J 2012, 16:430-438.
• [2]Patterson S, Mairs H, Borschmann R: Successful recruitment to trials: a phased approach to opening gates and building bridges. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011, 11:73. BioMed Central Full Text
• [3]Sanders KM, Stuart AL, Merriman EN, Read ML, Kotowicz MA, Young D, et al.: Trials and tribulations of recruiting 2,000 older women onto a clinical trial investigating falls and fractures: Vital D study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009, 9:78. BioMed Central Full Text
• [4]Golding J, Birmingham K: Enrollment and response rates in a longitudinal birth cohort. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2009, 23(Suppl 1):73-85.
• [5]Jaddoe VW, Mackenbach JP, Moll HA: The generation R study: design and cohort profile. Eur J Epidemiol 2006, 21:475-484.
• [6]Public Health Agency of Canada: What Mothers Say: The Canadian Maternity Experiences Survey. Ottawa: Government of Canada; 2009.
• [7]Manca DP, O’Beirne M, Lightbody T, Johnston DW, Dymianiw D, Nastalska K, et al.: The most effective strategy for recruiting a pregnancy cohort: a tale of two cities. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2013, 13:75. BioMed Central Full Text
• [8]Gracie SK, Lyon AW, Kehler HL, Pennell CE, Dolan SM, McNeil DA, et al.: All Our Babies Cohort Study: recruitment of a cohort to predict women at risk of preterm birth through the examination of gene expression profiles and the environment. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2010, 10:87. BioMed Central Full Text
• [9]Alberta Reproductive Health Report Working Group: Alberta Reproductive Health: Pregnancies and Births Table Update 2011. Edmonton, AB: Government of Alberta; 2011.
• [10]Statistics Canada. Calgary, Alberta (Code4806016) (table). 2006: Community Profiles. 2006 Census. In Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-591-XWE. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada; 2007.
• [11]Statistics Canada: Family income and income of individuals, related variable: Sub-provincial data, 2010. In Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 11-001-X. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada; 2012.
• [12]Golding J, Jones R, Brune MN, Pronczuk J: Why carry out a longitudinal birth survey? Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2009, 23(Suppl 1):1-14.
• [13]VanderWeele TJ: Bias formulas for sensitivity analysis for direct and indirect effects. Epidemiology 2010, 21(4):540-551.
• [14]Hawkes D, Plewis I: Modelling non-response in the National Child Development Study. J R Statis Soc 2006, 169:479-491.
• [15]Manolio TA, Weis BK, Cowie CC, et al.: New models for large prospective studies: is there a better way? Am J Epidemiol 2012, 175(9):859-866.
• [16]Cartwright A: Who responds to postal questionnaires? J Epidemiol Community Health 1986, 40:267-273.
• [17]Hapgood C, Elkind GS: Refusal to participate: effects on sample selection in a longitudinal study of postnatal mood. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol (Suppl ) 1989, 10:89-97.