Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research article

Patient perspectives on use of electronic health records for research recruitment

Authors: Laura M. Beskow, Kathleen M. Brelsford, Catherine M. Hammack

Published in: BMC Medical Research Methodology | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

EHR phenotyping offers the ability to rapidly assemble a precisely defined cohort of patients prescreened for eligibility to participate in health-related research. Even so, stakeholders in the process must still contend with the practical and ethical challenges associated with research recruitment. Patient perspectives on these matters are particularly important given that the success of research recruitment depends on patients’ willingness to participate.

Methods

We conducted 15 focus groups (n = 110 participants) in four counties in diverse regions of the southeastern US: Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta, and the Piedmont area of North Carolina. Based on a hypothetical study of a behavioral intervention for type 2 diabetes, we asked about the acceptability and appropriateness of direct investigator versus physician-mediated contact with patients for research recruitment, and whether patients should be asked to opt in or opt out of further contact in response to recruitment letters.

Results

For initial contact, nearly all participants said it would be acceptable for researchers to contact patients directly and three-fourths said that it would be acceptable for researchers to contact patients through their physicians. When we asked which would be most appropriate, a substantial majority chose direct contact. Themes that arose in the discussion included trust and transparency, decision-making power, the effect on research, and the effect on patient care. For response expectations, the vast majority of participants said both opt-in and opt-out would be acceptable—typically finding neither especially problematic and noting that both afford patients the opportunity to make their own decisions.

Conclusions

External validity relies heavily on researchers’ success enrolling eligible patients and failure to reach accrual targets is a costly and common barrier to advancing scientific knowledge. Our results suggest that patients recognize multiple advantages and disadvantages of different research recruitment strategies and place value on the implications not just for themselves, but also for researchers and healthcare providers. Our findings, including rich qualitative detail, contribute to the body of empirical and ethical literature on improving research recruitment and suggest specific ways forward as well as important areas for future research.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The “meaningful use” regulation for electronic health records. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(6):501–4.PubMedCrossRef Blumenthal D, Tavenner M. The “meaningful use” regulation for electronic health records. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(6):501–4.PubMedCrossRef
2.
3.
go back to reference Banda JM, Seneviratne M, Hernandez-Boussard T, Shah NH. Advances in electronic phenotyping: from rule-based definitions to machine learning models. Annu Rev Biomed Data Sci. 2018;1(1):53–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Banda JM, Seneviratne M, Hernandez-Boussard T, Shah NH. Advances in electronic phenotyping: from rule-based definitions to machine learning models. Annu Rev Biomed Data Sci. 2018;1(1):53–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Hripcsak G, Albers DJ. Next-generation phenotyping of electronic health records. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(1):117–21.PubMedCrossRef Hripcsak G, Albers DJ. Next-generation phenotyping of electronic health records. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(1):117–21.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Pathak J, Kho AN, Denny JC. Electronic health records-driven phenotyping: challenges, recent advances, and perspectives. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e2):e206–11.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Pathak J, Kho AN, Denny JC. Electronic health records-driven phenotyping: challenges, recent advances, and perspectives. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e2):e206–11.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Richesson RL, Hammond WE, Nahm M, Wixted D, Simon GE, Robinson JG, et al. Electronic health records based phenotyping in next-generation clinical trials: a perspective from the NIH health care systems Collaboratory. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e2):e226–31.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Richesson RL, Hammond WE, Nahm M, Wixted D, Simon GE, Robinson JG, et al. Electronic health records based phenotyping in next-generation clinical trials: a perspective from the NIH health care systems Collaboratory. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e2):e226–31.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Jensen PB, Jensen LJ, Brunak S. Mining electronic health records: towards better research applications and clinical care. Nat Rev Genet. 2012;13(6):395–405.PubMedCrossRef Jensen PB, Jensen LJ, Brunak S. Mining electronic health records: towards better research applications and clinical care. Nat Rev Genet. 2012;13(6):395–405.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Visweswaran S, Becich MJ, D’Itri VS, Sendro ER, MacFadden D, Anderson NR, et al. Accrual to clinical trials (ACT): a clinical and translational science award consortium network. JAMIA Open. 2018;1(2):147–52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Visweswaran S, Becich MJ, D’Itri VS, Sendro ER, MacFadden D, Anderson NR, et al. Accrual to clinical trials (ACT): a clinical and translational science award consortium network. JAMIA Open. 2018;1(2):147–52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Cowie MR, Blomster JI, Curtis LH, Duclaux S, Ford I, Fritz F, et al. Electronic health records to facilitate clinical research. Clin Res Cardiol. 2017;106(1):1–9.PubMedCrossRef Cowie MR, Blomster JI, Curtis LH, Duclaux S, Ford I, Fritz F, et al. Electronic health records to facilitate clinical research. Clin Res Cardiol. 2017;106(1):1–9.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Kopcke F, Prokosch HU. Employing computers for the recruitment into clinical trials: a comprehensive systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(7):e161.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Kopcke F, Prokosch HU. Employing computers for the recruitment into clinical trials: a comprehensive systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(7):e161.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Miotto R, Weng C. Case-based reasoning using electronic health records efficiently identifies eligible patients for clinical trials. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015;22(e1):e141–50.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Miotto R, Weng C. Case-based reasoning using electronic health records efficiently identifies eligible patients for clinical trials. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015;22(e1):e141–50.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Shivade C, Raghavan P, Fosler-Lussier E, Embi PJ, Elhadad N, Johnson SB, et al. A review of approaches to identifying patient phenotype cohorts using electronic health records. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(2):221–30.PubMedCrossRef Shivade C, Raghavan P, Fosler-Lussier E, Embi PJ, Elhadad N, Johnson SB, et al. A review of approaches to identifying patient phenotype cohorts using electronic health records. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014;21(2):221–30.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Coorevits P, Sundgren M, Klein GO, Bahr A, Claerhout B, Daniel C, et al. Electronic health records: new opportunities for clinical research. J Intern Med. 2013;274(6):547–60.PubMedCrossRef Coorevits P, Sundgren M, Klein GO, Bahr A, Claerhout B, Daniel C, et al. Electronic health records: new opportunities for clinical research. J Intern Med. 2013;274(6):547–60.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Patterson S, Mairs H, Borschmann R. Successful recruitment to trials: a phased approach to opening gates and building bridges. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Patterson S, Mairs H, Borschmann R. Successful recruitment to trials: a phased approach to opening gates and building bridges. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Stein MA, Shaffer M, Echo-Hawk A, Smith J, Stapleton A, Melvin A. Research START: A multimethod study of barriers and accelerators of recruiting research participants. Clin Transl Sci. 2015;8(6):647–54.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Stein MA, Shaffer M, Echo-Hawk A, Smith J, Stapleton A, Melvin A. Research START: A multimethod study of barriers and accelerators of recruiting research participants. Clin Transl Sci. 2015;8(6):647–54.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Kost RG, Mervin-Blake S, Hallarn R, Rathmann C, Kolb HR, Himmelfarb CD, et al. Accrual and recruitment practices at clinical and translational science award (CTSA) institutions: a call for expectations, expertise, and evaluation. Acad Med. 2014;89(8):1180–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Kost RG, Mervin-Blake S, Hallarn R, Rathmann C, Kolb HR, Himmelfarb CD, et al. Accrual and recruitment practices at clinical and translational science award (CTSA) institutions: a call for expectations, expertise, and evaluation. Acad Med. 2014;89(8):1180–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Obeid JS, Beskow LM, Rape M, Gouripeddi R, Black T, Cimino JJ, et al. A survey of practices for the use of electronic health records to support research recruitment. J Clin Transl Med. 2017;1:246–52. Obeid JS, Beskow LM, Rape M, Gouripeddi R, Black T, Cimino JJ, et al. A survey of practices for the use of electronic health records to support research recruitment. J Clin Transl Med. 2017;1:246–52.
19.
go back to reference Tenenbaum JD, Christian V, Cornish MA, Dolor RJ, Dunham AA, Ginsburg GS, et al. The MURDOCK study: a long-term initiative for disease reclassification through advanced biomarker discovery and integration with electronic health records. Am J Transl Res. 2012;4(3):291–301.PubMedPubMedCentral Tenenbaum JD, Christian V, Cornish MA, Dolor RJ, Dunham AA, Ginsburg GS, et al. The MURDOCK study: a long-term initiative for disease reclassification through advanced biomarker discovery and integration with electronic health records. Am J Transl Res. 2012;4(3):291–301.PubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Ellard-Gray A, Jeffrey NK, Choubak M, Crann SE. Finding the hidden participant: solutions for recruiting hidden, hard-to-reach, and vulnerable populations. Int J Qual Methods. 2015;14(5):1609406915621420.CrossRef Ellard-Gray A, Jeffrey NK, Choubak M, Crann SE. Finding the hidden participant: solutions for recruiting hidden, hard-to-reach, and vulnerable populations. Int J Qual Methods. 2015;14(5):1609406915621420.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Ginns P. Integrating information: a meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects. Learn Instr. 2006;16(6):511–25.CrossRef Ginns P. Integrating information: a meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects. Learn Instr. 2006;16(6):511–25.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Ware C. Information visualization: perception for design. 3rd ed. Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann; 2013. Ware C. Information visualization: perception for design. 3rd ed. Waltham, MA: Morgan Kaufmann; 2013.
24.
go back to reference Brelsford KM, Spratt SE, Beskow LM. Research use of electronic health records: patients’ perspectives on contact by researchers. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(9):1122–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Brelsford KM, Spratt SE, Beskow LM. Research use of electronic health records: patients’ perspectives on contact by researchers. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(9):1122–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Guest G, MacQueen KM, Namey EE. Applied thematic analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications; 2012.CrossRef Guest G, MacQueen KM, Namey EE. Applied thematic analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications; 2012.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference MacQueen KM, McLellan E, Kay K, Milstein B. Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis. Cult Anthropol Methods. 1998;10(2):31–6. MacQueen KM, McLellan E, Kay K, Milstein B. Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis. Cult Anthropol Methods. 1998;10(2):31–6.
27.
go back to reference National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office; 1979. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington DC: US Government Printing Office; 1979.
28.
go back to reference Beskow LM, Sandler RS, Weinberger M. Research recruitment through US central cancer registries: balancing privacy and scientific issues. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(11):1920–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Beskow LM, Sandler RS, Weinberger M. Research recruitment through US central cancer registries: balancing privacy and scientific issues. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(11):1920–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
go back to reference 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.PubMedCrossRef 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.PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Beskow LM, Botkin JR, Daly M, Juengst ET, Lehmann LS, Merz JF, et al. Ethical issues in identifying and recruiting participants for familial genetic research. Am J Med Genet A. 2004;130A(4):424–31.PubMedCrossRef Beskow LM, Botkin JR, Daly M, Juengst ET, Lehmann LS, Merz JF, et al. Ethical issues in identifying and recruiting participants for familial genetic research. Am J Med Genet A. 2004;130A(4):424–31.PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Beskow LM, Millikan RC, Sandler RS, Godley PA, Weiner BJ, Weinberger M. The effect of physician permission versus notification on research recruitment through cancer registries (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2006;17(3):315–23.PubMedCrossRef Beskow LM, Millikan RC, Sandler RS, Godley PA, Weiner BJ, Weinberger M. The effect of physician permission versus notification on research recruitment through cancer registries (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2006;17(3):315–23.PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Sharkey K, Savulescu J, Aranda S, Schofield P. Clinician gate-keeping in clinical research is not ethically defensible: an analysis. J Med Ethics. 2010;36(6):363–6.PubMedCrossRef Sharkey K, Savulescu J, Aranda S, Schofield P. Clinician gate-keeping in clinical research is not ethically defensible: an analysis. J Med Ethics. 2010;36(6):363–6.PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Weng C, Appelbaum P, Hripcsak G, Kronish I, Busacca L, Davidson KW, et al. Using EHRs to integrate research with patient care: promises and challenges. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012;19(5):684–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Weng C, Appelbaum P, Hripcsak G, Kronish I, Busacca L, Davidson KW, et al. Using EHRs to integrate research with patient care: promises and challenges. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2012;19(5):684–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Meslin EM. The recruitment of research participants and the role of the treating physician. Med Care. 2001;39(12):1270–2.PubMedCrossRef Meslin EM. The recruitment of research participants and the role of the treating physician. Med Care. 2001;39(12):1270–2.PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Newington L, Metcalfe A. Researchers’ and clinicians’ perceptions of recruiting participants to clinical research: a thematic meta-synthesis. J Clin Med Res. 2014;6(3):162–72.PubMedPubMedCentral Newington L, Metcalfe A. Researchers’ and clinicians’ perceptions of recruiting participants to clinical research: a thematic meta-synthesis. J Clin Med Res. 2014;6(3):162–72.PubMedPubMedCentral
36.
go back to reference Guillemin M, McDougall R, Martin D, Hallowell N, Brookes A, Gillam L. Primary care physicians’ views about gatekeeping in clinical research recruitment: a qualitative study. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017;8(2):99–105.PubMedCrossRef Guillemin M, McDougall R, Martin D, Hallowell N, Brookes A, Gillam L. Primary care physicians’ views about gatekeeping in clinical research recruitment: a qualitative study. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017;8(2):99–105.PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Beskow LM, Sandler RS, Millikan RC, Weinberger M. Patient perspectives on research recruitment through cancer registries. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16(10):1171–5.PubMedCrossRef Beskow LM, Sandler RS, Millikan RC, Weinberger M. Patient perspectives on research recruitment through cancer registries. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16(10):1171–5.PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Treweek S, Pitkethly M, Cook J, Fraser C, Mitchell E, Sullivan F, et al. Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2018;2:Mr000013. Treweek S, Pitkethly M, Cook J, Fraser C, Mitchell E, Sullivan F, et al. Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2018;2:Mr000013.
39.
go back to reference Miller CJ, Burgess JF Jr, Fischer EP, Hodges DJ, Belanger LK, Lipschitz JM, et al. Practical application of opt-out recruitment methods in two health services research studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17(1):57.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Miller CJ, Burgess JF Jr, Fischer EP, Hodges DJ, Belanger LK, Lipschitz JM, et al. Practical application of opt-out recruitment methods in two health services research studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017;17(1):57.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Weiss D, Murchison A, Hark L, Collymore B, Casten R, Brawer R, et al. Comparing opt-in versus opt-out recruitment strategies for ophthalmology research. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(15):2438. Weiss D, Murchison A, Hark L, Collymore B, Casten R, Brawer R, et al. Comparing opt-in versus opt-out recruitment strategies for ophthalmology research. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(15):2438.
41.
go back to reference Agre P, Rapkin B, Dougherty J, Wilson R. Barriers encountered conducting informed consent research. IRB. 2002;24(4):1–5.PubMedCrossRef Agre P, Rapkin B, Dougherty J, Wilson R. Barriers encountered conducting informed consent research. IRB. 2002;24(4):1–5.PubMedCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Williams B, Irvine L, McGinnis AR, McMurdo ME, Crombie IK. When “no” might not quite mean “no”; the importance of informed and meaningful non-consent: results from a survey of individuals refusing participation in a health-related research project. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7:59.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Williams B, Irvine L, McGinnis AR, McMurdo ME, Crombie IK. When “no” might not quite mean “no”; the importance of informed and meaningful non-consent: results from a survey of individuals refusing participation in a health-related research project. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7:59.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006;18(1):59–82.CrossRef Guest G, Bunce A, Johnson L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods. 2006;18(1):59–82.CrossRef
45.
go back to reference Boland MR, Hripcsak G, Shen Y, Chung WK, Weng C. Defining a comprehensive verotype using electronic health records for personalized medicine. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e2):e232–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Boland MR, Hripcsak G, Shen Y, Chung WK, Weng C. Defining a comprehensive verotype using electronic health records for personalized medicine. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2013;20(e2):e232–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Patient perspectives on use of electronic health records for research recruitment
Authors
Laura M. Beskow
Kathleen M. Brelsford
Catherine M. Hammack
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2288
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0686-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Medical Research Methodology 1/2019 Go to the issue