Recruitment of participants for the Estrogen Replacement and Atherosclerosis (ERA) trial: A comparison of costs, yields, and participant characteristics from community- and hospital-based recruitment strategies
S. Folmar et al., Recruitment of participants for the Estrogen Replacement and Atherosclerosis (ERA) trial: A comparison of costs, yields, and participant characteristics from community- and hospital-based recruitment strategies, CONTR CL TR, 22(1), 2001, pp. 13-25
This paper documents recruitment for the Estrogen Replacement and Atheroscl
erosis trial, a multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind angiographic
trial of the effects of opposed and unopposed estrogen on coronary atherosc
lerosis in postmenopausal women (average scheduled duration of follow-up 3.
2 years). We compare costs, yields, and participant characteristics between
community-based and hospital-based recruitment strategies. We further comp
are community-based enriched sources (i.e., those that allowed self-selecti
on or targeted women with known health characteristics) and nonenriched sou
rces. Data gathered on potential participants include method of contact, cl
inical site, eligibility, completion of screening visits, and randomization
rates. Demographic data on participants include age, race, education, mari
tal status, and income. Self-reported health status, smoking status, lipid
level, ejection fraction as well as history of chest pain, hypertension, an
d diabetes were recorded at baseline. Recruitment costswere estimated from
employee salaries and costs of screening tests and procedures. Yields were
compared by clinical site and by method of contact. Enriched sources of rec
ruitment yielded higher percentages of enrolled participants than nonenrich
ed sources. Both types of source resulted in demographically similar partic
ipants. Costs of community-based recruitment were Less than hospital-based
recruitment; however, screening costs were higher. Overall, screening and r
ecruitment averaged $2508 per randomized participant. (C) Elsevier Science
Inc. 2001.