Sunil Kripalani1, Kathryn Goggins2, Catherine Couey2, Vivian M Yeh3, Katharine M Donato4, John F Schnelle3, Kenneth A Wallston3. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN; Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. Electronic address: sunil.kripalani@vumc.org. 2. Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN; Center for Effective Health Communication, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. 3. Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. 4. Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine at which phase in the recruitment process for participation in clinical research studies do health literacy and other patient characteristics influence recruitment outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using a sample of 5872 patients hospitalized with cardiovascular disease approached for participation in the Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study from October 2011 through December 2015, we examined the independent association of patients' health literacy with two steps in their research participation decision-making process: (1) research interest - willingness to hear more about a research study; and (2) research participation - the decision to enroll after an informed consent discussion. Best practices for effective health communication were implemented in recruitment approaches and informed consent processes. Using logistic regression models, we determined patient characteristics independently associated with patients' willingness to hear about and participate in the study. RESULTS: In unadjusted analyses, participants with higher health literacy, and those who were younger, female, or had more education had higher levels of both research interest and research participation. Health literacy remained independently associated with both outcomes in multivariable models, after adjustment for sociodemographic factors. CONCLUSION: Because identical variables predicted both research interest and eventual consent, efforts to recruit broad populations must include acceptable methods of approaching potential participants as well as explaining study materials.
OBJECTIVE: To determine at which phase in the recruitment process for participation in clinical research studies do health literacy and other patient characteristics influence recruitment outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using a sample of 5872 patients hospitalized with cardiovascular disease approached for participation in the Vanderbilt Inpatient Cohort Study from October 2011 through December 2015, we examined the independent association of patients' health literacy with two steps in their research participation decision-making process: (1) research interest - willingness to hear more about a research study; and (2) research participation - the decision to enroll after an informed consent discussion. Best practices for effective health communication were implemented in recruitment approaches and informed consent processes. Using logistic regression models, we determined patient characteristics independently associated with patients' willingness to hear about and participate in the study. RESULTS: In unadjusted analyses, participants with higher health literacy, and those who were younger, female, or had more education had higher levels of both research interest and research participation. Health literacy remained independently associated with both outcomes in multivariable models, after adjustment for sociodemographic factors. CONCLUSION: Because identical variables predicted both research interest and eventual consent, efforts to recruit broad populations must include acceptable methods of approaching potential participants as well as explaining study materials.
Authors: Kenneth A Wallston; Courtney Cawthon; Candace D McNaughton; Russell L Rothman; Chandra Y Osborn; Sunil Kripalani Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2013-08-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: John H Stewart; Alain G Bertoni; Jennifer L Staten; Edward A Levine; Cary P Gross Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2007-08-08 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: David Wendler; Raynard Kington; Jennifer Madans; Gretchen Van Wye; Heidi Christ-Schmidt; Laura A Pratt; Otis W Brawley; Cary P Gross; Ezekiel Emanuel Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2005-12-06 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Sunil Kripalani; William J Heerman; Niral J Patel; Natalie Jackson; Kathryn Goggins; Russell L Rothman; Vivian M Yeh; Kenneth A Wallston; Duane T Smoot; Consuelo H Wilkins Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-01-25 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Nicole M Sekula; Torie C Plowden; Anne Waldo; Richard Bryce; Maricela Castillo-Mackenzie; Sonia Acosta; Felix Valbuena; Mercedes Carnethon; Erica E Marsh Journal: J Clin Transl Sci Date: 2022-01-31
Authors: Maiken Meldgaard; Rikke Damkjær Maimburg; Maiken Fabricius Damm; Anna Aaby; Anna Peeters; Helle Terkildsen Maindal Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-07 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Hannah Claire Sibold; Mary Catherine Thomson; Rachel Hianik; Eli R Abernethy; Gavin P Campbell; Bradley Sumrall; Melissa Dillmon; Josh Simmons; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Margie D Dixon; Rebecca D Pentz Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-07-21 Impact factor: 6.860