Jennifer M Sacheck1, Maria I Van Rompay2, Elizabeth M Olson2, Virginia R Chomitz3, Elizabeth Goodman4, Catherine M Gordon5, Misha Eliasziw3, Michael F Holick6, Christina D Economos2. 1. Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA jennifer.sacheck@tufts.edu. 2. Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA. 4. MassGeneral Hospital for Children and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Divisions of Adolescent Medicine and Endocrinology, Hasbro Children's Hospital, Providence, RI, USA. 6. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: While rarely used for supplementation trials in the United States, schools present a practical alternative to a clinical setting. PURPOSE: We describe the successful recruitment and retention of urban schoolchildren into a 6-month randomized, double-blind vitamin D3 supplementation trial. METHODS:Boston-area urban schoolchildren, aged 8-15 years, were recruited in 2011-2012 through classroom and auditorium presentations. Informed consent forms in five languages were sent home to parents. Retention methods included regular telephone calls and gift cards for completed study visits. RESULTS: In total, 691 schoolchildren enrolled. Their mean (standard deviation) age was 11.7 (1.4) years; 59% were racial/ethnic minorities and 68% qualified for free or reduced-price school meals. Multi-level, culturally sensitive, creative approaches contributed to success in recruitment and retention. Of 691 participants, 81% completed the 6-month intervention period. Reasons for attrition included missed appointments and fear of a blood draw. More children from households with higher incomes were retained than those from households with lower incomes (85% vs 79%, respectively, P = 0.04). LIMITATIONS: The need for three fasting blood draws over the 6-month supplementation period was a limiting factor in the recruitment and retention of children in this study. CONCLUSION: Recruitment of urban children into a school-based randomized controlled trial represents a feasible approach for a supplementation study. Particular attention to children of lower socioeconomic status may enhance participation and retention when conducting intervention studies among diverse populations.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: While rarely used for supplementation trials in the United States, schools present a practical alternative to a clinical setting. PURPOSE: We describe the successful recruitment and retention of urban schoolchildren into a 6-month randomized, double-blind vitamin D3 supplementation trial. METHODS: Boston-area urban schoolchildren, aged 8-15 years, were recruited in 2011-2012 through classroom and auditorium presentations. Informed consent forms in five languages were sent home to parents. Retention methods included regular telephone calls and gift cards for completed study visits. RESULTS: In total, 691 schoolchildren enrolled. Their mean (standard deviation) age was 11.7 (1.4) years; 59% were racial/ethnic minorities and 68% qualified for free or reduced-price school meals. Multi-level, culturally sensitive, creative approaches contributed to success in recruitment and retention. Of 691 participants, 81% completed the 6-month intervention period. Reasons for attrition included missed appointments and fear of a blood draw. More children from households with higher incomes were retained than those from households with lower incomes (85% vs 79%, respectively, P = 0.04). LIMITATIONS: The need for three fasting blood draws over the 6-month supplementation period was a limiting factor in the recruitment and retention of children in this study. CONCLUSION: Recruitment of urban children into a school-based randomized controlled trial represents a feasible approach for a supplementation study. Particular attention to children of lower socioeconomic status may enhance participation and retention when conducting intervention studies among diverse populations.
Authors: Diane C Berry; Madeline Neal; Emily Gail Hall; Robert G McMurray; Todd A Schwartz; Anne H Skelly; Cherie Smith-Miller Journal: Public Health Nurs Date: 2012-10-16 Impact factor: 1.462
Authors: Melissa S Putman; Sarah A B Pitts; Carly E Milliren; Henry A Feldman; Kristina Reinold; Catherine M Gordon Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2012-12-23 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Christina D Economos; Carolyn E Moore; Raymond R Hyatt; Julia Kuder; Tai Chen; Simin Nikbin Meydani; Mohsen Meydani; Ellen Klein; Rachael M Biancuzzo; Michael F Holick Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2013-10-18 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: R D Lewis; E M Laing; K M Hill Gallant; D B Hall; G P McCabe; D B Hausman; B R Martin; S J Warden; M Peacock; C M Weaver Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2013-10-03 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Daniel L Dickerson; Jennifer Parker; Carrie L Johnson; Ryan A Brown; Elizabeth J D'Amico Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2020-11-24 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Jennifer M Sacheck; Qiushi Huang; Maria I Van Rompay; Virginia R Chomitz; Christina D Economos; Misha Eliasziw; Catherine M Gordon; Elizabeth Goodman Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Maria I Van Rompay; Nicola M McKeown; Elizabeth Goodman; Misha Eliasziw; Virginia R Chomitz; Catherine M Gordon; Christina D Economos; Jennifer M Sacheck Journal: J Nutr Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Caleigh M Sawicki; Maria I Van Rompay; Lauren E Au; Catherine M Gordon; Jennifer M Sacheck Journal: J Nutr Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Jennifer M Sacheck; Maria I Van Rompay; Virginia R Chomitz; Christina D Economos; Misha Eliasziw; Elizabeth Goodman; Catherine M Gordon; Michael F Holick Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 5.958