Anita L Stewart1, Anna María Nápoles2, Sorbarikor Piawah3, Jasmine Santoyo-Olsson4, Jeanne A Teresi5. 1. Center for Aging in Diverse Communities, Institute for Health & Aging, University of California San Francisco, CA. 2. Division of Intramural Research, National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California San Francisco, CA. 4. Department of Medicine, Division of Internal Medicine, University of California San Francisco, and School of Public Health, University of California Berkeley, CA. 5. Columbia University Stroud Center at New York State Psychiatric Institute and Columbia Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Alzheimer's Disease Disparities (CIRAD), New York, NY.
Abstract
Background: In health disparities research, studies often fall short of their recruitment goals. Conducting a pilot feasibility study of recruitment in which data are collected systematically on recruitment processes can help investigators refine methods for the larger study. However, there are few guidelines for conducting pilot feasibility studies, and recruitment methods are seldom the focus. Feasibility indicators differ from traditional reports of recruitment results by focusing on the extent to which recruitment goals are met. Methods: We present an organizing framework for assessing the feasibility of recruitment that includes eight steps, briefly: 1) specify recruitment goals; 2) specify recruitment processes; 3) establish a tracking system for each individual; 4) establish a tracking database for monitoring processes and results; 5) implement recruitment and track each individual's progress; 6) summarize recruitment results; 7) calculate and interpret feasibility measures - were goals met; and 8) if goals were not met, utilize tracking data to modify methods for the larger study. We describe methods within each step, with added details for steps 2-5 (the specific processes). The framework draws from a small literature on recruitment feasibility with a focus on health disparities populations. The guidelines blend well-known methods of recruitment with additional information on calculating feasibility indicators. Conclusions: These guidelines provide a first step in thinking systematically about recruitment feasibility, to advance the field of measuring feasibility. Feasibility indicators also can be used to track the effectiveness of innovative recruitment strategies as part of building the science of recruitment, especially in disparities populations.
Background: In health disparities research, studies often fall short of their recruitment goals. Conducting a pilot feasibility study of recruitment in which data are collected systematically on recruitment processes can help investigators refine methods for the larger study. However, there are few guidelines for conducting pilot feasibility studies, and recruitment methods are seldom the focus. Feasibility indicators differ from traditional reports of recruitment results by focusing on the extent to which recruitment goals are met. Methods: We present an organizing framework for assessing the feasibility of recruitment that includes eight steps, briefly: 1) specify recruitment goals; 2) specify recruitment processes; 3) establish a tracking system for each individual; 4) establish a tracking database for monitoring processes and results; 5) implement recruitment and track each individual's progress; 6) summarize recruitment results; 7) calculate and interpret feasibility measures - were goals met; and 8) if goals were not met, utilize tracking data to modify methods for the larger study. We describe methods within each step, with added details for steps 2-5 (the specific processes). The framework draws from a small literature on recruitment feasibility with a focus on health disparities populations. The guidelines blend well-known methods of recruitment with additional information on calculating feasibility indicators. Conclusions: These guidelines provide a first step in thinking systematically about recruitment feasibility, to advance the field of measuring feasibility. Feasibility indicators also can be used to track the effectiveness of innovative recruitment strategies as part of building the science of recruitment, especially in disparities populations.
Authors: Deborah J Bowen; Matthew Kreuter; Bonnie Spring; Ludmila Cofta-Woerpel; Laura Linnan; Diane Weiner; Suzanne Bakken; Cecilia Patrick Kaplan; Linda Squiers; Cecilia Fabrizio; Maria Fernandez Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Jasmine Santoyo-Olsson; Anita L Stewart; Cathy Samayoa; Helen Palomino; Aday Urias; Nayeli Gonzalez; Alma Torres-Nguyen; LaVerne Coleman; Cristian Escalera; Vicken Y Totten; Carmen Ortiz; Anna Maria Nápoles Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Sam S Oh; Joshua Galanter; Neeta Thakur; Maria Pino-Yanes; Nicolas E Barcelo; Marquitta J White; Danielle M de Bruin; Ruth M Greenblatt; Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo; Alan H B Wu; Luisa N Borrell; Chris Gunter; Neil R Powe; Esteban G Burchard Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2015-12-15 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Alka M Kanaya; Ann Chang; Michael Schembri; Ankita Puri-Taneja; Shweta Srivastava; Swapna S Dave; Evangeline N Vijayakumar; Zubaida Qamar; Hemalatha D Naik; Faiza Siddiqui; Namratha R Kandula Journal: J Clin Transl Sci Date: 2019-05-27
Authors: Alicia K Matthews; Marcus Murray; Josef Ben Levi; David Odell; Rohan Jeremiah; LeAndre Moore; Damilola Oyaluade; Alexis Chappel; Larisa Burke; Karriem Watson Journal: Am J Mens Health Date: 2022 May-Jun