Literature DB >> 32128561

Effect of a Home Pregnancy Test Intervention on Cohort Retention and Pregnancy Detection: A Randomized Trial.

Lauren A Wise1, Tanran R Wang1, Sydney K Willis1, Amelia K Wesselink1, Kenneth J Rothman1,2, Elizabeth E Hatch1.   

Abstract

We conducted a parallel, nonblinded randomized trial to assess whether offering home pregnancy tests (HPTs) to preconception cohort study participants influenced cohort retention or pregnancy detection. Pregnancy Study Online participants were female, aged 21-45 years, attempting pregnancy, and not using fertility treatment. At enrollment (2017-2018), 1,493 participants with 6 or fewer cycles of attempt time were randomly assigned with 50% probability to receive 12 Clearblue visual HPTs plus the standard protocol (n = 720) or the standard protocol alone (n = 773). Women completed bimonthly questionnaires for 12 months or until conception, whichever came first. In intent-to-treat analyses, retention (≥1 follow-up) was higher in the HPT arm (n = 598; 83%) than the standard protocol arm (n = 535 (69%); mean difference = 15%, 95% CI: 10, 19). Mean time at first pregnancy testing was identical in both arms (2 days before expected menses), as was mean gestational weeks at first positive pregnancy test (4 weeks). Conception was reported by 78% of women in the HPT arm and 75% in the standard protocol arm. Spontaneous abortion was reported by 21% in the HPT arm (mean gestational weeks = 7) and 21% in the standard protocol arm (mean gestational weeks = 6). Randomization of HPTs was associated with greater cohort retention but had little impact on incidence or timing of pregnancy detection.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cohort studies; fertility; incentives; internet; methods; pregnancy

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32128561      PMCID: PMC7407601          DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwaa027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0002-9262            Impact factor:   4.897


  12 in total

1.  Comparison of web and mail surveys in collecting illicit drug use data: a randomized experiment.

Authors:  Sean Esteban McCabe
Journal:  J Drug Educ       Date:  2004

2.  Designing prospective cohort studies for assessing reproductive and developmental toxicity during sensitive windows of human reproduction and development--the LIFE Study.

Authors:  Germaine M Buck Louis; Enrique F Schisterman; Anne M Sweeney; Timothy C Wilcosky; Robert E Gore-Langton; Courtney D Lynch; Dana Boyd Barr; Steven M Schrader; Sungduk Kim; Zhen Chen; Rajeshwari Sundaram
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2011-06-20       Impact factor: 3.980

3.  Comparison of volunteers' experience of using, and accuracy of reading, different types of home pregnancy test formats.

Authors:  Joanna Pike; Sonya Godbert; Sarah Johnson
Journal:  Expert Opin Med Diagn       Date:  2013-08-19

4.  Design and Conduct of an Internet-Based Preconception Cohort Study in North America: Pregnancy Study Online.

Authors:  Lauren A Wise; Kenneth J Rothman; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Joseph B Stanford; Amelia K Wesselink; Craig McKinnon; Siobhan M Gruschow; Casie E Horgan; Aleta S Wiley; Kristen A Hahn; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Elizabeth E Hatch
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.980

5.  Associations between blood metals and fecundity among women residing in New York State.

Authors:  Michael S Bloom; Germaine M Buck Louis; Rajeshwari Sundaram; Paul J Kostyniak; Jinesh Jain
Journal:  Reprod Toxicol       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 3.143

6.  Use of a highly sensitive and specific immunoradiometric assay for detection of human chorionic gonadotropin in urine of normal, nonpregnant, and pregnant individuals.

Authors:  E G Armstrong; P H Ehrlich; S Birken; J P Schlatterer; E Siris; W C Hembree; R E Canfield
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 5.958

7.  Measuring early pregnancy loss: laboratory and field methods.

Authors:  A J Wilcox; C R Weinberg; R E Wehmann; E G Armstrong; R E Canfield; B C Nisula
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  1985-09       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Incidence of early loss of pregnancy.

Authors:  A J Wilcox; C R Weinberg; J F O'Connor; D D Baird; J P Schlatterer; R E Canfield; E G Armstrong; B C Nisula
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1988-07-28       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Self pregnancy testing in an urban family planning clinic: promising results for a new approach to contraceptive follow-up.

Authors:  Christopher M Estes; Jahanett Ramirez; Jahanett Ramierez; Lorraine Tiezzi; Carolyn Westhoff
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2007-11-26       Impact factor: 3.375

10.  Comparing Web-based with Mail Survey Administration of the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Clinician and Group Survey.

Authors:  Steven C Bergeson; Janiece Gray; Lynn A Ehrmantraut; Tracy Laibson; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Prim Health Care       Date:  2013-04-15
View more
  2 in total

1.  Self-testing for pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Caitlin E Kennedy; Ping Teresa Yeh; Karima Gholbzouri; Manjulaa Narasimhan
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 2.692

2.  International Natural Procreative Technology Evaluation and Surveillance of Treatment for Subfertility (iNEST): enrollment and methods.

Authors:  Joseph B Stanford; Tracey Parnell; Kristi Kantor; Matthew R Reeder; Shahpar Najmabadi; Karen Johnson; Iris Musso; Hanna Hartman; Elizabeth Tham; Ira Winter; Krzysztof Galczynski; Anne Carus; Amy Sherlock; Jean Golden Tevald; Maciej Barczentewicz; Barbara Meier; Paul Carpentier; Karen Poehailos; Robert Chasuk; Peter Danis; Lewis Lipscomb
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2022-08-09
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.