Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Recruiting former melanoma patients via hospitals in comparison to office-based dermatologists in a register-based cohort study that required indirect contact

Authors: S. R. Zeissig, V. Weyer-Elberich, K. Emrich, H. Binder, S. Fischbeck, B. H. Imruck, P. Friedrich-Mai, M. E. Beutel, M. Blettner

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There are detailed reviews about different recruitment strategies, but not with regard to differences between recruitment of hospital-based versus office-based physicians. Within this study, the two different recruitment schemes are compared. Advantages and disadvantages of different ways of recruitment in registry-based studies are discussed.

Methods

In a cross-sectional cancer-registry-based study, long-term melanoma patients were contacted by dermatologists rather than directly by the registry on the basis of the legal situation. Logistic regression models and generalized estimating equations were used to assess effects of various patient and physician characteristics on participation and data quality. Especially differences between hospital-based versus office-based dermatologists are evaluated.

Results

Seventy two out of 112 contacted dermatologists took part in the study (64.3%). The cooperation proportion was 52.2% (689 participants/1320 contacted patients). Participants and non-participants differed regarding age and sex, but not regarding other social demographic factors and cancer stage.
We did not observe a difference in patient participation between hospital-based versus office-based dermatologists (OR 1.08 [CI 0.84–1.39]; p = 0.57). However, medical data provided by the cancer registry were better for participants registered and recruited by hospitals.

Conclusions

In cohort studies with epidemiological cancer registries, recruitment via physicians has potential disadvantages and is more complex. If this indirect way of contact is mandatory, we recommend recruitment procedures including hospital-based rather than office-based physicians. However, physician characteristics were not associated with outcome.
Literature
1.
2.
3.
Gurwitz JH, Guadagnoli E, Landrum MB, Silliman RA, Wolf R, Weeks JC. The treating physician as active gatekeeper in the recruitment of research subjects. Med Care. 2001;39(12):1339–44.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Sugarman J, Regan K, Parker B, Bluman LG, Schildkraut J. Ethical ramifications of alternative means of recruiting research participants from cancer registries. Am Cancer Soc. 1999;86(4):647–51. Epub 1999/08/10
5.
Schwartz CE, Fox BH. Who says yes? Identifying selection biases in a psychosocial intervention study of multiple sclerosis. Soc Sci Med. 1995;40(3):359–70. Epub 1995/02/01CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Emrich K, Ressing G, Zeißig S, Seebauer G, Blettner M. Krebs in Rheinland-Pfalz 2011. Mainz: Krebsregister Rheinland-Pfalz; 2014.
8.
Bermejo I, Niebling W, Berger M, Härter M. Patients’ and physicians’ evaluation of the PHQ-D for depression screening. Prim Care Community Psychiatr. 2005;10(4):125–31.CrossRef
9.
Löwe B, Müller S, Brähler E, Kroenke K, Albani C, Decker O. Validierung und Normierung eines kurzen Selbstratinginstrumentes zur Generalisierten Angst (GAD-7) in einer repräsentativen Stichprobe der deutschen Allgemeinbevölkerung. Psychother Psych Med. 2007;57(02):A050.CrossRef
10.
Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishman SB, de Haes JC, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85(5):365–76.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Smets EM, Garssen B, Bonke B, De Haes JC. The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) psychometric qualities of an instrument to assess fatigue. J Psychosom Res. 1995;39(3):315–25.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Strittmatter G. HF. Hornheider Fragebogen. In: Schumacher J, Klaiberg A, Brähler E, editors. Diagnostische Verfahren zu Lebensqualität und Wohlbefinden. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2003. p. 164–9.
13.
Ramm GC, Hasenbring M. Die deutsche Adaptation der Illness-specific Social Support Scale und ihre teststatistische Überprüfung beim Einsatz an Patienten vor und nach Knochenmarktransplantation. Z Med Psychol. 2003;12(1):29–38.
14.
Scheier MF, Carver CS, Bridges MW. Distinguishing optimism from neuroticism (and trait anxiety, self-mastery, and self-esteem): a reevaluation of the life orientation test. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1994;67(6):1063–78.CrossRefPubMed
15.
16.
Slattery ML, Edwards SL, Caan BJ, Kerber RA, Potter JD. Response rates among control subjects in case-control studies. Ann Epidemiol. 1995;5(3):245–9.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Koch L, Jansen L, Herrmann A, Stegmaier C, Holleczek B, Singer S, Brenner H, Arndt V. Quality of life in long-term breast cancer survivors – a 10-year longitudinal population-based study. Acta Oncol. 2013;52(6):1119–28.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Vogel RI, Strayer LG, Leah E, Nelson HH, Blaes AH, Anderson KE, Lazivich DA. Sub exposure and protection behaviors among long-term melanoma survivors and population controls. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2017;26:607–13.CrossRef
19.
Mehnert A, Koch U. Psychological comorbidity and health-related quality of life and its association with awareness, utilization, and need for psychosocial support in a cancer register-based sample of long-term breast cancer survivors. J Psychosom Res. 2008;64:383–91.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Waldmann A, Nolte S, Pritzkuleit R, Breitbart EW, Katalinic A. Different aspects of self-reported quality of life in 450 German melanoma survivors. Cancer. 2011;3:2316–32.CrossRef
21.
Koch L, Bertram H, Eberle A, Holleczek B, Schmid-Höpfner S, Waldmann A, Zeissig SR, Brenner H, Arndt V. Fear of recurrence in long-term breast cancer survivors-still an issue. Results on prevalence, determinants, and the association with quality of life and depression from the cancer survivorship - a multi-regional population-based study. Psychooncology. 2013. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​pon.​3452.
22.
Johnston S, Liddy C, Hogg W, Donskov M, Russell G, Gyorfi-Dyke E. Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of physicians and practices for primary care health services research at one centre. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:3–8.CrossRef
23.
Asch S, Connor SE, Hamilton EG, Fox SA. Problems in recruiting community-based physicians for health services research. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:591–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Carey TS, Kinsinger L, Keyserling T, Harris R. Research in the community: recruiting and retaining practices. J Community Health. 1996;21(5):315–27.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Levinson W, Dull V, Roter D, Chaumeton N, Frankel RM. Recruiting physicians for office-based research. Med Care. 1998;36(6):934–7.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Brodaty H, Gibson LH, Waine ML, Shell AM, Lilian R, Pond CD. Research in general practice: a survey of incentives and disincentives for research participation. Ment Health Fam Med. 2013;10(3):163–73.PubMedPubMedCentral
27.
28.
Tournoux C, Katsahian S, Chevret S, Levy V. Factors influencing inclusion of patients with malignancies in clinical trials. Cancer. 2006;106(2):258–70.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Jones J. The effects of non-response on statistical inference. J Health Soc Policy. 1996;8(1):49–62.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Recruiting former melanoma patients via hospitals in comparison to office-based dermatologists in a register-based cohort study that required indirect contact
Authors
S. R. Zeissig
V. Weyer-Elberich
K. Emrich
H. Binder
S. Fischbeck
B. H. Imruck
P. Friedrich-Mai
M. E. Beutel
M. Blettner
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0425-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2017 Go to the issue

Research Article

A random effects meta-analysis model with Box-Cox transformation

Research article

Applied Swarm-based medicine: collecting decision trees for patterns of algorithms analysis

Technical advance

ERDO - a framework to select an appropriate randomization procedure for clinical trials

Research article

Practical application of opt-out recruitment methods in two health services research studies

Research article

Estimating the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) with incomplete follow-up data

Research article

The impact of the lookback period and definition of confirmatory events on the identification of incident cancer cases in administrative data