Recruitment for an Internet-Based Diabetes Self-Management Program: Scientific and Ethical Implications
- 556 Downloads
Little is known about the reach of Internet self-management interventions.
The aim of this study was to evaluate different definitions of participation rate and compare characteristics among subcategories of participants and nonparticipants on demographic and clinical factors using de-identified electronic medical record data.
Data are presented on recruitment results and characteristics of 2,603 health maintenance organization members having type 2 diabetes invited to participate in an Internet self-management program.
There was a 37% participation rate among all members attempted to contact and presumed eligible. There were several significant differences between participants and nonparticipants and among subgroups of participants (e.g., proactive volunteers vs. telephone respondents) on factors including age, income, ethnicity, smoking rate, education, blood pressure, and hemoglobin A1c.
These results have important implications for the impact of different recruitment methods on health disparities and generalization of results. We provide recommendations for reporting of eligibility rate, participation rate, and representativeness analyses.
KeywordsRecruitment Participation Clinical trials Representativeness Research methods
- 2.Glasgow RE. What types of evidence are most needed to advance behavioral medicine? Ann Behav Med. 2007; 35: 19–25.Google Scholar
- 8.Tate D. Introduction to special series on the Science of Internet Intervention Research. Annals Behav Med. 2010. In Press.Google Scholar
- 14.Danaher BG, Seeley JR. Methodological issues in research on web-based behavioral interventions. Annals Behav Med. 2010. In Press.Google Scholar
- 15.Glasgow RE, Strycker LA, King D, et al. Robustness of a computer-assisted diabetes self-management intervention across patient characteristics, healthcare settings, and intervention staff. Am J Manage Care. 2006; 12: 137–145. PMID 16524346.Google Scholar
- 16.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Age adjusted percentage of population with diagnosed diabetes by race and sex, 1980-2006. www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/prev/national/figraceethsex.htm. Accessed September 21, 2009.
- 17.Nielson J. Digital divide: The three stages. Useit.com. www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Shifing_net-pop-report.pdf. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
- 24.Glasgow RE, Christiansen S, Kurz D, King D, Woolley T, Faber A, et al. Engagement in a diabetes self-management website: Usage patterns and correlates. Submitted for publication, 2009.Google Scholar
- 25.Quinn E. PAR-Q: The physical activity readiness questionnaire, take the PAR-Q before you start and exercise program. http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/fitnessevalandassessment/qt/PAR-Q.htm. Accessed September 21, 2009.
- 28.Parra-Medina D, D'Antonio A, Smith SM, Levin S, Kirkner G, Mayer-Davis E. Successful recruitment and retention strategies for a randomized weight management trial for people with diabetes living in rural, medially underserved counties of South Carolina: The POWER study. J Am Diet Assoc. 2004; 104: 70–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 31.Chong N. The Latino Patient: A Cultural Guideline for Health Care Providers. Boston: International Press; 2002.Google Scholar