Literature DB >> 32054690

Using Marketing Automation to Modernize Data Collection in the California Teachers Study Cohort.

Kristen E Savage1, Jennifer L Benbow2, Christine Duffy3, Emma S Spielfogel2, Nadia T Chung2, Sophia S Wang2, Maria Elena Martinez4, James V Lacey2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Like other cancer epidemiologic cohorts, the California Teachers Study (CTS) has experienced declining participation to follow-up questionnaires; neither the reasons for these declines nor the steps that could be taken to mitigate these trends are fully understood.
METHODS: The CTS offered their 6th study questionnaire (Q6) in the fall of 2017 using an integrated, online system. The team delivered a Web and mobile-adaptive questionnaire to 45,239 participants via e-mail using marketing automation technology. The study's integrated platform captured data on recruitment activities that may influence overall response, including the date and time invitations and reminders were e-mailed and the date and time questionnaires were started and submitted.
RESULTS: The overall response rate was 43%. Participants ages 65 to 69 were 25% more likely to participate than their younger counterparts (OR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.18-1.32) and nonwhite participants were 28% less likely to participate than non-Hispanic white cohort members (OR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.68-0.76). Previous questionnaire participation was strongly associated with response (OR = 6.07; 95% CI, 5.50-6.70). Invitations sent after 2 pm had the highest response (OR = 1.75; 95% CI, 1.65-1.84), as did invitations sent on Saturdays (OR = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.36-1.60).
CONCLUSIONS: An integrated system that captures paradata about questionnaire recruitment and response can enable studies to quantify the engagement patterns and communication desires of cohort members. IMPACT: As cohorts continue to collect scientific data, it is imperative to collect and analyze information on how participants engage with the study.See all articles in this CEBP Focus section, "Modernizing Population Science." ©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32054690      PMCID: PMC8667715          DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-0841

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  8 in total

1.  Web-based questionnaires: the future in epidemiology?

Authors:  Marleen M H J van Gelder; Reini W Bretveld; Nel Roeleveld
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  High breast cancer incidence rates among California teachers: results from the California Teachers Study (United States).

Authors:  Leslie Bernstein; Mark Allen; Hoda Anton-Culver; Dennis Deapen; Pamela L Horn-Ross; David Peel; Richard Pinder; Peggy Reynolds; Jane Sullivan-Halley; Dee West; William Wright; Al Ziogas; Ronald K Ross
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.506

Review 3.  Participation rates in epidemiologic studies.

Authors:  Sandro Galea; Melissa Tracy
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2007-06-06       Impact factor: 3.797

4.  Use of a web-based questionnaire in the Black Women's Health Study.

Authors:  Cordelia W Russell; Deborah A Boggs; Julie R Palmer; Lynn Rosenberg
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-10-11       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  50 % Response rates: half-empty, or half-full?

Authors:  James V Lacey; Kristen E Savage
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 2.506

6.  When epidemiology meets the Internet: Web-based surveys in the Millennium Cohort Study.

Authors:  Besa Smith; Tyler C Smith; Gregory C Gray; Margaret A K Ryan
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-08-28       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Samantha Teague; George J Youssef; Jacqui A Macdonald; Emma Sciberras; Adrian Shatte; Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz; Chris Greenwood; Jennifer McIntosh; Craig A Olsson; Delyse Hutchinson
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 8.  A systematic review of the effect of retention methods in population-based cohort studies.

Authors:  Cara L Booker; Seeromanie Harding; Michaela Benzeval
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-04-19       Impact factor: 3.295

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.