BACKGROUND: Traditional research approaches frequently fail to yield representative numbers of people of color in research. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) may be an important strategy for partnering with and reaching populations that bear a greater burden of illness but have been historically difficult to engage. The Community Action Board, consisting of 20 East Harlem residents, leaders, and advocates, used CBPR to compare the effectiveness of various strategies in recruiting and enrolling adults with prediabetes into a peer-led, diabetes prevention intervention. METHODS: The board created five recruitment strategies: recruiting through clinicians; recruiting at large public events such as farmers markets; organizing special local recruitment events; recruiting at local organizations; and recruiting through a partner-led approach, in which community partners developed and managed the recruitment efforts at their sites. RESULTS: In 3 months, 555 local adults were approached; 249 were appropriate candidates for further evaluation (overweight, nonpregnant, East Harlem residents without known diabetes); 179 consented and returned in a fasting state for 1/2 day of prediabetes testing; 99 had prediabetes and enrolled in a pilot randomized trial. The partner-led approach was highly successful, recruiting 68% of those enrolled. This strategy was also the most efficient; 34% of those approached through partners were ultimately enrolled, versus 0%-17% enrolled through the other four strategies. Participants were predominantly low-income, uninsured, undereducated, Spanish-speaking women. CONCLUSIONS: This CBPR approach highlights the value of partner-led recruitment to identify, reach out to, and motivate a vulnerable population into participation in research, using techniques that may be unfamiliar to researchers but are nevertheless rigorous and effective.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Traditional research approaches frequently fail to yield representative numbers of people of color in research. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) may be an important strategy for partnering with and reaching populations that bear a greater burden of illness but have been historically difficult to engage. The Community Action Board, consisting of 20 East Harlem residents, leaders, and advocates, used CBPR to compare the effectiveness of various strategies in recruiting and enrolling adults with prediabetes into a peer-led, diabetes prevention intervention. METHODS: The board created five recruitment strategies: recruiting through clinicians; recruiting at large public events such as farmers markets; organizing special local recruitment events; recruiting at local organizations; and recruiting through a partner-led approach, in which community partners developed and managed the recruitment efforts at their sites. RESULTS: In 3 months, 555 local adults were approached; 249 were appropriate candidates for further evaluation (overweight, nonpregnant, East Harlem residents without known diabetes); 179 consented and returned in a fasting state for 1/2 day of prediabetes testing; 99 had prediabetes and enrolled in a pilot randomized trial. The partner-led approach was highly successful, recruiting 68% of those enrolled. This strategy was also the most efficient; 34% of those approached through partners were ultimately enrolled, versus 0%-17% enrolled through the other four strategies. Participants were predominantly low-income, uninsured, undereducated, Spanish-speaking women. CONCLUSIONS: This CBPR approach highlights the value of partner-led recruitment to identify, reach out to, and motivate a vulnerable population into participation in research, using techniques that may be unfamiliar to researchers but are nevertheless rigorous and effective.
Authors: K R Lorig; P Ritter; A L Stewart; D S Sobel; B W Brown; A Bandura; V M Gonzalez; D D Laurent; H R Holman Journal: Med Care Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Sharon B Wyatt; Nancy Diekelmann; Frances Henderson; Michael E Andrew; Gloria Billingsley; Sherry H Felder; Sonja Fuqua; Priscilla B Jackson Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2003 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: Giselle Corbie-Smith; Alice S Ammerman; Mira L Katz; Diane Marie M St George; Connie Blumenthal; Chanetta Washington; Benita Weathers; Thomas C Keyserling; Boyd Switzer Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Sela Panapasa; James Jackson; Cleopatra Caldwell; Steve Heeringa; James McNally; David Williams; Debra Coral; Leafa Taumoepeau; Louisa Young; Setafano Young; Saia Fa'asisila Journal: Prog Community Health Partnersh Date: 2012
Authors: Stephen J Lepore; Maria A Rincon; Joanne S Buzaglo; Mitch Golant; Morton A Lieberman; Sarah Bauerle Bass; Suzanne Chambers Journal: Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Date: 2019-07 Impact factor: 2.520
Authors: Margaret G Stineman; Neville Strumpf; Jibby E Kurichi; Jeremy Charles; Jeane Ann Grisso; Ravishankar Jayadevappa Journal: Gerontologist Date: 2011-06
Authors: Victoria L Mayer; Nita Vangeepuram; Kezhen Fei; Emily A Hanlen-Rosado; Guedy Arniella; Rennie Negron; Ashley Fox; Kate Lorig; Carol R Horowitz Journal: Health Educ Behav Date: 2019-08-23
Authors: Anne B Newman; M Larissa Avilés-Santa; Garnet Anderson; Gerardo Heiss; Wm James Howard; Mitchell Krucoff; Lewis H Kuller; Cora E Lewis; Jennifer G Robinson; Herman Taylor; Roberto P Treviño; William Weintraub Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2015-12-02 Impact factor: 2.226