首页> 外文期刊>Clinical trials: journal of the Society for Clinical Trials >Proactive versus reactive recruitment to a physical activity intervention for breast cancer survivors: Does it matter?
【24h】

Proactive versus reactive recruitment to a physical activity intervention for breast cancer survivors: Does it matter?

机译:对乳腺癌幸存者进行体育锻炼的主动招募与被动招募:重要吗?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Background There is a gap in the current breast cancer survivorship literature identifying potential sample biases that may result from recruiting participants via different methods. Purpose To document whether participant recruitment method influences baseline demographic or psychosocial variables and trial participation among breast cancer survivors recruited for a physical activity intervention trial. Methods Participants were recruited for the trial via either a reactive method (letters mailed through their oncologist's office inviting them to contact the research staff) or a proactive method (referred in person by their oncologist at a clinic appointment). The groups of participants recruited via the two methods were compared based on baseline sociodemographic characteristics, weight, time since diagnosis, stage of disease, treatment, motivational readiness for physical activity, level of physical activity, self-reported physical and mental health, willingness to receive the intervention, and study retention. Results Participants recruited proactively were closer to the point of diagnosis (mean = 2.5 years, standard deviation (SD) = 1.9 years) than participants recruited reactively via letter mailings (mean = 3.4 years, SD = 2.3 years; p < .05). The two groups were similar with respect to all other baseline characteristics and retention. Limitations Recruitment via the two methods was not concurrent. Also, proactive recruitment occurred at a single hospital site. Mailings were made by the oncologists; we are unable to estimate howmany letterswere mailed. Similarly, we have no information for the patients who were not referred to the study during proactive recruitment. Conclusions Despite the potential for differences in characteristics and degree of trial participation between trial participants recruited proactively and reactively, in this investigation, the two groups were similar. Information from other trials in other conditions may confirm or modify our conclusion.
机译:背景技术在目前的乳腺癌生存研究文献中,存在一种差距,即通过不同方法招募参与者可能导致的潜在样本偏倚。目的记录参与者的招募方法是否影响基线人口统计学或社会心理变量以及参加体育锻炼干预试验的乳腺癌幸存者中的试验参与。方法通过反应性方法(通过其肿瘤科医生办公室寄来的邀请他们与研究人员联系的信件)或主动方法(由肿瘤科医生亲自去诊所预约)招募参与者进行试验。根据基线社会人口统计学特征,体重,诊断以来的时间,疾病阶段,治疗,体育活动的动机准备,体育活动的水平,自我报告的身心健康,愿意接受的意愿,比较了通过两种方法招募的参与者组。接受干预,并研究保留率。结果主动招募的参与者比通过信件邮寄方式招募的参与者(平均= 3.4年,SD = 2.3年; p <.05)更接近诊断点(平均= 2.5年,标准差(SD)= 1.9年)。两组在所有其他基线特征和保留方面相似。局限性两种方法的招聘不是同时进行的。此外,在单个医院现场进行了主动招募。邮件是由肿瘤学家寄出的;我们无法估计邮寄了多少封信。同样,我们也没有主动招募期间未转入研究的患者的信息。结论尽管前瞻性和反应性招募的试验参与者之间在参加试验的特征和程度上可能存在差异,但在本研究中,两组相似。来自其他条件下其他试验的信息可能会证实或修改我们的结论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号