OBJECTIVE: In 2010, the National Children's Study launched 3 alternative recruitment methods to test possible improvements in efficiency compared with traditional household-based recruitment and participant enrollment. In 2012, a fourth method, provider-based sampling (PBS), tested a probability-based sampling of prenatal provider locations supplemented by a second cohort of neonates born at a convenience sample of maternity hospitals. METHODS: From a sampling frame of 472 prenatal care provider locations and 59 maternity hospitals, 49 provider and 7 hospital locations within or just outside 3 counties participated in study recruitment. During first prenatal care visits or immediately postdelivery at these locations, face-to-face contact was used to screen and recruit eligible women. RESULTS: Of 1450 screened women, 1270 were eligible. Consent rates at prenatal provider locations (62%-74% by county) were similar to those at birth locations (64%-77% by county). During 6 field months, 3 study centers enrolled a total prenatal cohort of 530 women (the majority in the first trimester) and during 2 months enrolled a birth cohort of an additional 320 mother-newborn dyads. As personnel became experienced in the field, the time required to enroll a woman in the prenatal cohort declined from up to 200 hours to 50 to 100 hours per woman recruited. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that PBS was feasible and operationally efficient in recruiting a representative cohort of newborns from 3 diverse US counties. Our findings suggest that PBS is a practical approach to recruit large pregnancy and birth cohorts across the United States.
OBJECTIVE: In 2010, the National Children's Study launched 3 alternative recruitment methods to test possible improvements in efficiency compared with traditional household-based recruitment and participant enrollment. In 2012, a fourth method, provider-based sampling (PBS), tested a probability-based sampling of prenatal provider locations supplemented by a second cohort of neonates born at a convenience sample of maternity hospitals. METHODS: From a sampling frame of 472 prenatal care provider locations and 59 maternity hospitals, 49 provider and 7 hospital locations within or just outside 3 counties participated in study recruitment. During first prenatal care visits or immediately postdelivery at these locations, face-to-face contact was used to screen and recruit eligible women. RESULTS: Of 1450 screened women, 1270 were eligible. Consent rates at prenatal provider locations (62%-74% by county) were similar to those at birth locations (64%-77% by county). During 6 field months, 3 study centers enrolled a total prenatal cohort of 530 women (the majority in the first trimester) and during 2 months enrolled a birth cohort of an additional 320 mother-newborn dyads. As personnel became experienced in the field, the time required to enroll a woman in the prenatal cohort declined from up to 200 hours to 50 to 100 hours per woman recruited. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that PBS was feasible and operationally efficient in recruiting a representative cohort of newborns from 3 diverse US counties. Our findings suggest that PBS is a practical approach to recruit large pregnancy and birth cohorts across the United States.
Authors: M R Frankel; M F Shapiro; N Duan; S C Morton; S H Berry; J A Brown; M A Burnam; S E Cohn; D P Goldman; D F McCaffrey; S M Smith; P A St Clair; J F Tebow; S A Bozzette Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: M F Shapiro; M L Berk; S H Berry; C A Emmons; L A Athey; D C Hsia; A A Leibowitz; C A Maida; M Marcus; J F Perlman; C L Schur; M A Schuster; J W Senterfitt; S A Bozzette Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Kathleen Belanger; Stephen Buka; Debra C Cherry; Donald J Dudley; Michael R Elliott; Daniel E Hale; Irva Hertz-Picciotto; Jessica L Illuzzi; Nigel Paneth; James M Robbins; Elizabeth W Triche; Michael B Bracken Journal: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol Date: 2012-09-27 Impact factor: 3.980
Authors: Laura L Blaisdell; Jennifer A Zellner; Alison A King; Elaine Faustman; Mari Wilhelm; Mark L Hudak; Robert D Annett Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Daniel E Hale; Sharon B Wyatt; Stephen Buka; Debra Cherry; Kendall K Cislo; Donald J Dudley; Pearl Anna McElfish; Gwendolyn S Norman; Simone A Reynolds; Anna Maria Siega-Riz; Sandra Wadlinger; Cheryl K Walker; James M Robbins Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Patricia M McGovern; Nancy M Nachreiner; Jane L Holl; Neal Halfon; Dana Dabelea; Laura Caulfield; Jane A Cauley; Mark S Innocenti; Laura Amsden; Nina Markovic; Minsun Riddles; Sara Adams Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Peter K Gilbertson; Susan Forrester; Linda Andrews; Kathleen McCann; Lydia Rogers; Christina Park; Jack Moye Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2021-03-05