Participant retention in follow-up studies of intensive care unit survivors - A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize participant retention data and related reporting in studies evaluating post-hospital outcomes of survivors of critical illness after an intensive care unit (ICU) stay.

REVIEW METHOD USED

A synthesis of literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry. Hand searched reference lists and personal files of relevant narrative and systematic review articles.

REVIEW METHODS

Articles were screened by pairs of independent reviewers. Similarly, data were abstracted by pairs of data collectors, with conflicts resolved by consensus or by a third reviewer.

RESULTS

We included 243 publications, from 225 unique studies of 87,602 participants. Participant retention could not be calculated for any time-points in 13% of studies nor in 22% of all follow-up time-points. Retention ranged from 18-100%. When compared to follow-up before 1-month, retention at each later timepoint was not significantly different. Age and sex were not associated with retention and more recent studies had decreased retention (odds ratio: 0.94 [95% confidence interval: 0.92-0.96; p < 0.001]). Reporting of retention-related study methodology was inconsistent.

CONCLUSION

Retention rate could not be calculated for 22% of study follow-up time-points, with retention at the remaining time-points generally being high (≥85%), but with high variability (18% - 100%). ICU survivorship research could be improved via: (i) more detailed guidance on reporting participant retention, and (ii) use of existing resources and best practices to facilitate better study design and to improve participant retention to preserve statistical power and reduce selection bias.

The importance of methods for site performance evaluation in REPRIEVE, a longitudinal, global, multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

REPRIEVE, the Randomized Trial to Prevent Vascular Events in HIV, is a multicenter, primary prevention trial evaluating whether a statin can prevent major cardiovascular events in people with HIV. REPRIEVE is conducted at >100 clinical research sites (CRSs) globally. Detailed, comprehensive, and novel methods for evaluating and communicating CRS performance are required to ensure trial integrity and data quality. In this analysis we describe a comprehensive multidimensional methodology for evaluating CRS performance.

METHODS

The REPRIEVE Data Coordinating and Clinical Coordinating Centers developed a robust system for evaluation of and communication with CRSs, designed to identify potential issues and obstacles to performance, provide real-time technical support, and make recommendations for process improvements to facilitate efficient trial execution. We describe these systems and evaluate their impact on participant retention, data management, and specimen management from 2019 to 2022, corresponding to the period from end of recruitment to present. This evaluation was based on pre-defined metrics, regular reviews, and bidirectional communication.

RESULTS

Participant retention, data management, and specimen management all remained steady over the three-year period, although metrics varied by country of enrollment. Targeted messaging relating to certain performance metrics was effective.

CONCLUSION

Site performance is vital to ensure trial integrity and achievement of key trial goals. This analysis demonstrates that utilization of a comprehensive approach allows for a thorough evaluation of CRS performance, facilitates data and specimen management, and enhances participant retention. Our approach may serve as a guidepost for maximizing future large-scale clinical trials' operational success and scientific rigor.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier: NCT02344290.

Recruitment and retention of emerging adults in lifestyle interventions: Findings from the REACH trial

OBJECTIVE

Emerging adulthood (EA) is a critical time to promote cardiometabolic health, but EAs are underrepresented in lifestyle intervention trials. Knowledge gaps exist regarding how best to recruit and retain sociodemographically diverse EAs. Our goal was to begin to address these gaps using data from the Richmond Emerging Adults Choosing Health (REACH) Trial.

METHODS

REACH was a comparative efficacy trial for EAs, age 18-25, with a body mass index of 25-45 kg/m2. Enrollment goals were: N = 381, ≥40% underrepresented race/ethnicity, ≥30% men, ≥85% retention at 6 months. We translated formative work into a recruitment and retention plan, examined yield for recruitment and retention overall, and by gender and race/ethnicity, as well as cost data. Descriptive statistics and chi square tests were used.

RESULTS

Enrollment benchmarks were met overall (N = 382) and for participants from underrepresented race/ethnic backgrounds (58.0%), but not men (17.3%). The most common recruitment sources were email (26.9%), radio (22.2%), and online radio (15.4%); this pattern largely held true across gender and race/ethnic groups, though word of mouth and participant referral together accounted for nearly a quarter of enrolled men. Costs averaged $155 per randomized participant. Retention was 89% at 3-months, 84% at 6-months (primary endpoint) and 80% at 12-months (follow-up), with no significant differences by gender or race/ethnicity (all p's > 0.05). Retention did not differ by recruitment method (p = .69).

CONCLUSIONS

Grounding our approach in formative data and embracing participants as partners in research contributed to the recruitment and retention of sociodemographically diverse EAs. Additional efforts are needed to enroll EA men.

Establishing communication challenges and preferences among clinical trial participants in an under-resourced setting to improve adherence to study visits and participant retention

BACKGROUND

Ensuring protocol visit compliance and maintaining high participant retention remain critical elements of clinical trials. In the HVTN 702 HIV vaccine trial, Setshaba Research Centre in Soshanguve, Tshwane, South Africa, experienced challenges in communicating with participants to remind them about their study visits. In order to improve participants adhering to their study visits, and study retention, we aimed to identify challenges in mobile communication, and to establish preferences in communication methods and interest in receiving study information via cellphones.

METHODS

We conducted a paper-based survey among HVTN 702 HIV vaccine trial participants at Setshaba Research Centre. The survey comprised of dichotomous and scale questions and was completed voluntarily and anonymously. The questions included those on their primary form of communication (calling, SMS and WhatsApp), the best time of day for the site to communicate with them, whether they were interested in receiving regular general study information updates via their cellular phone, how often they changed their cellular phones and/or network, whether they experienced any challenges with their cellular phones and what these challenges were, if any. All participants scheduled to visit the clinic from February to May 2019 were invited to participate. Thus, 90 of 380 (24%) participants enrolled by May 2019 were surveyed.

RESULTS

The majority (68%) of participants were 26-35 years old and almost three-quarters (73%) were female. Almost all participants (99%) had a personal cellphone. Half of the participants experienced some challenge related to cellphones, these being poor network signal at home (12%), battery running flat frequently (11%), sharing their phone (9%), lack of data (9%), challenges with use of applications (6%) and their cellphones being unreliable (3%). Annually, 20% of participants made a single or multiple network changes. Communication preferences were calls by site staff (80%), SMS (16%) and WhatsApp (3%). Most preferred to be contacted in the morning (49%) or afternoon (31%). Site contact was rated as 'very helpful' (87%), and 97% were interested in receiving regular general study information updates via their cellphone.

CONCLUSION

Despite participants owning cellphones, there are still technical challenges, for example, network signals, battery-charging and applications. The majority of participants preferred being called rather than communicating by text messages or WhatsApp. Future studies need to include addressing participant challenges in maintaining contact and training of participants on use of cellphone applications to optimise communication. Noting the preferred time of day for participants to be called might improve the likelihood of making contact with them. The willingness to receive updates will aid in keeping participant interest high and enhance retention.

Developing an online, searchable database to systematically map and organise current literature on retention research (ORRCA2)

BACKGROUND

Addressing recruitment and retention challenges in trials is a key priority for methods research, but navigating the literature is difficult and time-consuming. In 2016, ORRCA (www.orrca.org.uk) launched a free, searchable database of recruitment research that has been widely accessed and used to support the update of systematic reviews and the selection of recruitment strategies for clinical trials. ORRCA2 aims to create a similar database to map the growing volume and importance of retention research.

METHODS

Searches of Medline (Ovid), CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection and the Cochrane Library, restricted to English language and publications up to the end of 2017. Hand searches of key systematic reviews were undertaken and randomised evaluations of recruitment interventions within the ORRCA database on 1 October 2020 were also reviewed for any secondary retention outcomes. Records were screened by title and abstract before obtaining the full text of potentially relevant articles. Studies reporting or evaluating strategies, methods and study designs to improve retention within healthcare research were eligible. Case reports describing retention challenges or successes and studies evaluating participant reported reasons for withdrawal or losses were also included. Studies assessing adherence to treatments, attendance at appointments outside of research and statistical analysis methods for missing data were excluded. Eligible articles were categorised into one of the following evidence types: randomised evaluations, non-randomised evaluations, application of retention strategies without evaluation and observations of factors affecting retention. Articles were also mapped against a retention domain framework. Additional data were extracted on research outcomes, methods and host study context.

RESULTS

Of the 72,904 abstracts screened, 4,364 full texts were obtained, and 1,167 articles were eligible. Of these, 165 (14%) were randomised evaluations, 99 (8%) non-randomised evaluations, 319 (27%) strategies without evaluation and 584 (50%) observations of factors affecting retention. Eighty-four percent (n = 979) of studies assessed the numbers of participants retained, 27% (n = 317) assessed demographic differences between retained and lost participants, while only 4% (n = 44) assessed the cost of retention strategies. The most frequently reported domains within the 165 studies categorised as 'randomised evaluations of retention strategies' were participant monetary incentives (32%), participant reminders and prompts (30%), questionnaire design (30%) and data collection location and method (26%).

CONCLUSION

ORRCA2 builds on the success of ORRCA extending the database to organise the growing volume of retention research. Less than 15% of articles were randomised evaluations of retention strategies. Mapping of the literature highlights several areas for future research such as the role of research sites, clinical staff and study design in enhancing retention. Future studies should also include cost-benefit analysis of retention strategies.

A cross-sectional survey of potential factors, motivations, and barriers influencing research participation and retention among people who use drugs in the rural USA

BACKGROUND

Despite high morbidity and mortality among people who use drugs (PWUD) in rural America, most research is conducted within urban areas. Our objective was to describe influencing factors, motivations, and barriers to research participation and retention among rural PWUD.

METHODS

We recruited 255 eligible participants from community outreach and community-based, epidemiologic research cohorts from April to July 2019 to participate in a cross-sectional survey. Eligible participants reported opioid or injection drug use to get high within 30 days and resided in high-needs rural counties in Oregon, Kentucky, and Ohio. We aggregated response rankings to identify salient influences, motivations, and barriers. We estimated prevalence ratios to assess for gender, preferred drug use, and geographic differences using log-binomial models.

RESULTS

Most participants were male (55%) and preferred methamphetamine (36%) over heroin (35%). Participants reported confidentiality, amount of financial compensation, and time required as primary influential factors for research participation. Primary motivations for participation include financial compensation, free HIV/HCV testing, and contribution to research. Changed or false participant contact information and transportation are principal barriers to retention. Respondents who prefer methamphetamines over heroin reported being influenced by the purpose and use of their information (PR = 1.12; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.26). Females and Oregonians (versus Appalachians) reported knowing and wanting to help the research team as participation motivation (PR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.26 and PR = 2.12; 95% CI: 1.51, 2.99).

CONCLUSIONS

Beyond financial compensation, researchers should emphasize confidentiality, offer testing and linkage with care, use several contact methods, aid transportation, and accommodate demographic differences to improve research participation and retention among rural PWUD.

Improving retention of community-recruited participants in HIV prevention research through Saturday household visits; findings from the HPTN 071 (PopART) study in South Africa

BACKGROUND

Identifying successful strategies to improve participant retention in longitudinal studies remains a challenge. In this study we evaluated whether non-traditional fieldworker shifts (after hours during the week and weekends) enhanced participant retention when compared to retention during traditional weekday shifts in the HPTN 071 (PopART) population cohort (PC).

METHODS

HPTN 071 (PopART) PC participants were recruited and followed up in their homes on an annual basis by research fieldworkers over a 3-4 year period. The average number of successful follow-up visits, where a PC participant was found and retained in the study, was calculated for each of 3 visit schedules (early weekday shift, late weekday shift, and Saturday shift), and standardized to account for variation in fieldwork shift duration. We used one-way univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) to describe differences in mean-successful visits and 95% confidence intervals between the shift types.

RESULTS

Data on 16 651 successful visits were included. Successful visit rates were higher when conducting Saturday visits (14.0; 95% CI: 11.3-16.6) compared to both regular (4.5; 95% CI: 3.7-5.3) and late weekday shifts (5.3; 95% CI: 4.7-5.8) overall and in all subgroup analyses (P<0.001). The successful visit rate was higher amongst women than men were during all shift types (3.2 vs. 1.3, p<0.001). Successful visit rates by shift type did not differ significantly by age, over time, by PC round or by community triplet.

CONCLUSION

The number of people living with HIV continues to increase annually. High quality evidence from longitudinal studies remains critical for evaluating HIV prevention and treatment strategies. This study showed a significant benefit on participant retention through introduction of Saturday shifts for home visits and these data can make an important contribution to the emerging body of evidence for improving retention in longitudinal research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PopART was approved by the Stellenbosch University Health Research Ethics Committees (N12/11/074), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (6326) ethics committee and the Division of AIDS (DAIDS) (Protocol ID 11865). PopART was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number NCT01900977 ).

Recruitment, retention, and adherence in a randomized feasibility trial of mindfulness-based stress reduction for patients with migraine

OBJECTIVES

Increasing evidence demonstrates effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) for pain-related and functional disorders. In order to conduct successful and efficient trials of MBSR, evidence regarding the relative performance of strategies to improve recruitment, retention, and adherence is required, but few studies have examined these issues specifically.

DESIGN

In preparation for a fully powered trial, we conducted a 2-arm, parallel comparison randomized controlled feasibility trial of MBSR vs. usual-care for 60 patients with migraine headache.

SETTING

Two large U.S. health systems in Northern California.

INTERVENTION

MBSR is an 8-week classroom-based intervention that combines mindfulness meditation and yoga, with didactic presentations about stress psychology and group process/experiential education. Participants received the intervention at their choice of one of several existing, vetted community-based classes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Successful recruitment was defined a priori as 18 participants within any 9-week period or 60 participants enrolled within a 36-week period. We considered participants adherent to the intervention if they attended at least 5 of the 8 weekly classes and the day-long retreat.

RESULTS

We successfully enrolled 18 participants within a 7-week period, however, we did not attain our second goal of recruiting 60 participants within a 36-week period. Sixty-eight percent of our participants were adherent to the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that close monitoring of recruitment activities, flexibility in protocol modifications, and integration within the delivery system were crucial factors for successful participant recruitment, retention, and adherence in mindfulness research.

Non-randomised evaluations of strategies to increase participant retention in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Retention of participants is essential to ensure the statistical power and internal validity of clinical trials. Poor participant retention reduces power and can bias the estimates of intervention effect. There is sparse evidence from randomised comparisons of effective strategies to retain participants in randomised trials. Currently, non-randomised evaluations of trial retention interventions embedded in host clinical trials are rejected from the Cochrane review of strategies to improve retention because it only included randomised evaluations. However, the systematic assessment of non-randomised evaluations may inform trialists' decision-making about retention methods that have been evaluated in a trial context.Therefore, we performed a systematic review to synthesise evidence from non-randomised evaluations of retention strategies in order to supplement existing randomised trial evidence.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from 2007 to October 2017. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full-text articles for non-randomised studies that compared two or more strategies to increase participant retention in randomised trials. The retention trials had to be nested in real 'host' trials ( including feasibility studies) but not hypothetical trials. Two investigators independently rated the risk of bias of included studies using the ROBINS-I tool and determined the certainty of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) framework.

RESULTS

Fourteen non-randomised studies of retention were included in this review. Most retention strategies (in 10 studies) aimed to increase questionnaire response rate. Favourable strategies for increasing questionnaire response rate were telephone follow-up compared to postal questionnaire completion, online questionnaire follow-up compared to postal questionnaire, shortened version of questionnaires versus longer questionnaires, electronically transferred monetary incentives compared to cash incentives, cash compared with no incentive and reminders to non-responders (telephone or text messaging). However, each retention strategy was evaluated in a single observational study. This, together with risk of bias concerns, meant that the overall GRADE certainty was low or very low for all included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides low or very low certainty evidence on the effectiveness of retention strategies evaluated in non-randomised studies. Some strategies need further evaluation to provide confidence around the size and direction of the underlying effect.

Digital tools for the recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a systematic map

BACKGROUND

Recruiting and retaining participants in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is challenging. Digital tools, such as social media, data mining, email or text-messaging, could improve recruitment or retention, but an overview of this research area is lacking. We aimed to systematically map the characteristics of digital recruitment and retention tools for RCTs, and the features of the comparative studies that have evaluated the effectiveness of these tools during the past 10 years.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, other databases, the Internet, and relevant web sites in July 2018 to identify comparative studies of digital tools for recruiting and/or retaining participants in health RCTs. Two reviewers independently screened references against protocol-specified eligibility criteria. Included studies were coded by one reviewer with 20% checked by a second reviewer, using pre-defined keywords to describe characteristics of the studies, populations and digital tools evaluated.

RESULTS

We identified 9163 potentially relevant references, of which 104 articles reporting 105 comparative studies were included in the systematic map. The number of published studies on digital tools has doubled in the past decade, but most studies evaluated digital tools for recruitment rather than retention. The key health areas investigated were health promotion, cancers, circulatory system diseases and mental health. Few studies focussed on minority or under-served populations, and most studies were observational. The most frequently-studied digital tools were social media, Internet sites, email and tv/radio for recruitment; and email and text-messaging for retention. One quarter of the studies measured efficiency (cost per recruited or retained participant) but few studies have evaluated people's attitudes towards the use of digital tools.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic map highlights a number of evidence gaps and may help stakeholders to identify and prioritise further research needs. In particular, there is a need for rigorous research on the efficiency of the digital tools and their impact on RCT participants and investigators, perhaps as studies-within-a-trial (SWAT) research. There is also a need for research into how digital tools may improve participant retention in RCTs which is currently underrepresented relative to recruitment research.

REGISTRATION

Not registered; based on a pre-specified protocol, peer-reviewed by the project's Advisory Board.

Using digital tools in the recruitment and retention in randomised controlled trials: survey of UK Clinical Trial Units and a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is a key determinant of success but is challenging. Trialists and UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) Clinical Trials Units (CTUs) are increasingly exploring the use of digital tools to identify, recruit and retain participants. The aim of this UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) study was to identify what digital tools are currently used by CTUs and understand the performance characteristics required to be judged useful.

METHODS

A scoping of searches (and a survey with NIHR funding staff), a survey with all 52 UKCRC CTUs and 16 qualitative interviews were conducted with five stakeholder groups including trialists within CTUs, funders and research participants. A purposive sampling approach was used to conduct the qualitative interviews during March-June 2018. Qualitative data were analysed using a content analysis and inductive approach.

RESULTS

Responses from 24 (46%) CTUs identified that database-screening tools were the most widely used digital tool for recruitment, with the majority being considered effective. The reason (and to whom) these tools were considered effective was in identifying potential participants (for both Site staff and CTU staff) and reaching recruitment target (for CTU staff/CI). Fewer retention tools were used, with short message service (SMS) or email reminders to participants being the most reported. The qualitative interviews revealed five themes across all groups: 'security and transparency'; 'inclusivity and engagement'; 'human interaction'; 'obstacles and risks'; and 'potential benefits'. There was a high level of stakeholder acceptance of the use of digital tools to support trials, despite the lack of evidence to support them over more traditional techniques. Certain differences and similarities between stakeholder groups demonstrated the complexity and challenges of using digital tools for recruiting and retaining research participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Our studies identified a range of digital tools in use in recruitment and retention of RCTs, despite the lack of high-quality evidence to support their use. Understanding the type of digital tools in use to support recruitment and retention will help to inform funders and the wider research community about their value and relevance for future RCTs. Consideration of further focused digital tool reviews and primary research will help to reduce gaps in the evidence base.

Assessing effective interventions to improve trial retention: do they contain behaviour change techniques?

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials often struggle to retain the number of participants required to make valid and reliable assessments about the effectiveness of treatments. Several individual randomised comparisons of interventions to improve retention in trials have been shown to be effective. Many of these retention interventions target participants' behaviour (e.g. returning questionnaires or attending a follow-up visit). Although not designed as such, these interventions can be thought of as behaviour change interventions. By coding the constituent behaviour change components of effective retention interventions, the interventions' potential 'active ingredients' responsible for improvements in retention can be identified and maximised for future gains.

METHODS

Studies reporting effective retention interventions were identified from existing meta-analyses in the literature. Published manuscripts and intervention and comparator group material were coded into their behaviour change techniques (BCTs) using the BCT taxonomy version 1. Two authors independently coded materials using a standardised coding manual and discussed any disagreements to reach consensus. Data on study characteristics including host trial context, timing, mode of delivery and dosage of retention intervention were recorded.

RESULTS

Two intervention types were identified as having evidence of improving retention in existing meta-analyses: monetary incentives and electronic prompts. None of the interventions identified from the included studies explicitly stated a theoretical rationale for their development. BCTs were identified in both intervention and comparator groups across both intervention types and there was heterogeneity with regard to their presentation within and across interventions. The BCTs identified in the 'monetary incentive' interventions differed to the comparator group. Contrastingly, the BCTs identified in 'electronic prompts' interventions were identical in both the control and intervention groups (within studies) and differed only in terms of mode of delivery and dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

Attending a measurement visit or returning a questionnaire is a behaviour and trialists should be mindful of this when designing retention interventions. Our work in this area provides some of the first evidence of the impact of implicit use of BCTs in retention interventions and highlights their potential promise for future trials.

What are the most important unanswered research questions in trial retention? A James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership: the PRioRiTy II (Prioritising Retention in Randomised Trials) study

BACKGROUND

One of the top three research priorities for the UK clinical trial community is to address the gap in evidence-based approaches to improving participant retention in randomised trials. Despite this, there is little evidence supporting methods to improve retention. This paper reports the PRioRiTy II project, a Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) that identified and prioritised unanswered questions and uncertainties around trial retention in collaboration with key stakeholders.

METHODS

This PSP was conducted in collaboration with the James Lind Alliance, a non-profit making initiative, to support key stakeholders (researchers, patients, and the public) in jointly identifying and agreeing on priority research questions. There were three stages. (1) First an initial online survey was conducted consisting of six open-ended questions about retention in randomised trials. Responses were coded into thematic groups to create a longlist of questions. The longlist of questions was checked against existing evidence to ensure that they had not been answered by existing research. (2) An interim stage involved a further online survey where stakeholders were asked to select questions of key importance from the longlist. (3) A face-to-face consensus meeting was held, where key stakeholder representatives agreed on an ordered list of 21 unanswered research questions for methods of improving retention in randomised trials.

RESULTS

A total of 456 respondents yielded 2431 answers to six open-ended questions, from which 372 questions specifically about retention were identified. Further analysis included thematically grouping all data items within answers and merging questions in consultation with the Steering Group. This produced 27 questions for further rating during the interim survey. The top 21 questions from the interim online survey were brought to a face-to-face consensus meeting in which key stakeholder representatives prioritised the order. The 'Top 10' of these are reported in this paper. The number one ranked question was 'What motivates a participant's decision to complete a clinical trial?' The entire list will be available at www.priorityresearch.ie .

CONCLUSION

The Top 10 list can inform the direction of future research on trial methods and be used by funders to guide projects aiming to address and improve retention in randomised trials.

Principles of Precision Prevention Science for Improving Recruitment and Retention of Participants

Precision medicine and precision public health focus on identifying and providing the right intervention to the right population at the right time. Expanding on the concept, precision prevention science could allow the field to examine prevention programs to identify ways to make them more efficient and effective at scale, including addressing issues related to engagement and retention of participants. Research to date on engagement and retention has often focused on demographics and risk factors. The current paper proposes using McCurdy and Daro (Family Relations, 50, 113-121, 2001) model that posits a complex mixture of individual, provider, program, and community-level factors synergistically affect enrollment, engagement, and retention. The paper concludes recommending the use of research-practice partnerships and innovative, rapid cycle methods to design and improve prevention programs related to participant engagement and retention at scale.

Women's experiences of participating in a prospective, longitudinal postpartum depression study: insights for perinatal mental health researchers

Barriers to recruitment for research on mental illness include participant distrust of researchers and social stigma. Though these issues may be acutely important in perinatal mental health research, they remain unexplored in this context. In order to inform strategies to more fully engage women in perinatal mental health research, we explored the motivations and experiences of women with a history of major depressive disorder who participated in a prospective longitudinal research study on postpartum depression (PPD). Sixteen women with a history of depression who had either completed or recently made a decision about participation in a longitudinal research study about PPD were interviewed by telephone. Qualitative, semi-structured interviews explored participants' decision-making about, and experiences of, participation. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and qualitatively analyzed using elements of grounded theory methodology. Follow-up interviews were conducted with four participants to refine and clarify preliminary results. Foundational elements necessary for women to consider participating in PPD research included personal acceptance of illness and trust in the research team/institution. Other main motivators included perceived personal relevance, anticipated benefits (including access to support/resources, learning opportunities, and improved self-worth), altruism, and accessible study procedures. Our data suggest that participating in perinatal mental health research may help women make meaning of their mental illness experience and is perceived as providing support. The findings-particularly around the importance of participant-researcher rapport and accessibility of study design-may inform strategies that improve participation rates, decrease attrition, and maximize participant benefits in perinatal mental health research.

Cultural Connections: the Key to Retention of Black, Latina, and Arab Women in the Kin Keeper(SM) Cancer Prevention Intervention Studies

Diverse racial and ethnic populations must be included in research studies in order to address health disparities. Retaining hard-to-reach populations including poor, underserved, and racial/ethnic groups in longitudinal studies can be quite difficult. Using innovative retention strategies that address culture and community are imperative. The objective of this report is to identify and describe strategies for successful retention rates among a unique group of hard-to-reach racial/ethnic participants. We analyzed the follow-up rates in two different cohorts using the Kin Keeper(SM) study design. The aim of Study A was to examine the capability of the Kin Keeper(SM) education to increase health literacy in breast and cervical cancer. The primary aim of Study B was to measure changes in breast and cervical cancer screening after receiving the Kin Keeper(SM) education. Retention rates were analyzed and compared over 12 months for both cohorts. We found good retention rates for both cohorts with each having a unique set of differences. The overall follow-up rate was 82 % for Study A and 88 % for Study B with demographic differences between the studies reported herein. Despite changing cultural, community, and geopolitical factors, we were able to maintain consistent participation for each study. We attribute high retention rates to trusted cultural connections and the flexibility to adjust retention strategies.

We should really keep in touch: predictors of the ability to maintain contact with contraception clinical trial participants over 12 months

OBJECTIVES

This study assesses the ability to maintain contact with participants enrolled in an emergency contraception (EC) trial with 12 months of follow-up based on the modes of contact they provided at enrollment.

STUDY DESIGN

Data came from a clinical trial offering women the copper intrauterine device or oral levonorgestrel for EC. A modified Poisson regression was used to assess predictors associated with the ability to contact study participants 12 months after enrollment.

RESULTS

Data were available for 542 participants; 443 (82%) could be contacted at 12 months. Contact at 12 months was greatest for those whose preferred the method of contact was text messaging, e-mail or any (62/68; 91% contacted) and worst for the 18 who had a landline phone (only 7 contacted; 39%). After controlling for age, having an e-mail address, text messaging, language preference, type of EC chosen and insurance, preferred contact other than phone increased the likelihood of follow-up by 10% [risk ratio (RR) 1.1 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-1.2], while having a landline reduced a woman's likelihood of being contacted at 12 months by 50% compared to women with a contract cell (RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-1.0).

CONCLUSION

The few women with a landline for contact had poor follow-up at 1 year, while women who preferred e-mail or text had the highest rate of follow-up.

IMPLICATIONS

Understanding how best to reduce loss to follow-up is an essential component of conducting a contraceptive clinical trial. Improved participant retention maximizes internal validity and allows for important clinical outcomes, such as pregnancy, to be assessed.