pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Recruitment and Retention for Community-Based eHealth Interventions with Populations of Low Socioeconomic Position: Strategies and Challenges - PubMed

  • ️Tue Jan 01 2013

Recruitment and Retention for Community-Based eHealth Interventions with Populations of Low Socioeconomic Position: Strategies and Challenges

Rebekah H Nagler et al. J Commun. 2013.

Abstract

Given persistent communication inequalities, it is important to develop interventions to improve Internet and health literacy among underserved populations. These goals drove the Click to Connect (C2C) project, a community-based eHealth intervention that provided novice computer users of low socioeconomic position (SEP) with broadband Internet access, training classes, a Web portal, and technical support. In this paper, we describe the strategies used to recruit and retain this population, the budgetary implications of such strategies, and the challenges and successes we encountered. Results suggest that personal contact between study staff and participants and provision of in-depth technical support were central to successful recruitment and retention. Such investments are essential to realize the promise of eHealth with underserved populations.

Keywords: Participant recruitment; communication inequalities; community-based interventions; eHealth; participant retention; underserved populations.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1

Click to Connect participant recruitment.

Figure 2
Figure 2

Number of pretest survey scheduling attempts per enrolled participant (N = 324).

Figure 3
Figure 3

Click to Connect retention for intervention and control participants. a 12 participants were deemed ineligible post-randomization. Once C2C staff began installing computers in intervention participants’ homes, they determined that 11 participants had a pre-existing broadband connection, and one was living with a Wave 1 control participant. Removing these 12 ineligible participants yielded a final baseline N of 324. b An additional 11 participants (8 intervention, 3 control) were lost post-randomization; thus, a total of 313 participants remained in the trial.

Figure 4
Figure 4

Number of posttest survey scheduling attempts per study participant with complete follow-up (N = 275).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Adler NE, Stewart J, Cohen S, Cullen M, Diez Roux AV, Dow W, Williams D. Reaching for a healthier life. San Francisco, CA: The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Socioeconomic Status and Health; 2007. Retrieved from www.macses.ucsf.edu/downloads/Reaching_for_a_Healthier_Life.pdf.
    1. Ahern DK, Kreslake JM, Phalen JM. What is eHealth (6): perspectives on the evolution of eHealth research. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2006;8(1):e4. doi: 10.2196/jmir.8.1.e4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Berger LK, Begun AL, Otto-Salaj LL. Participant recruitment in intervention research: scientific integrity and cost-effective strategies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2009;12(1):79–92. doi: 10.1080/13645570701606077. - DOI
    1. Berkman LF, Kawachi I. Social epidemiology. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000.
    1. Blumenthal DS, Sung J, Coates R, Williams J, Liff J. Recruitment and retention of subjects for a longitudinal cancer prevention study in an inner-city Black community. Health Services Research. 1995;30(1):197–205. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources