Research with families facing cancer: The challenges of accrual and retention
Identifieur interne : 005398 ( Main/Exploration ); précédent : 005397; suivant : 005399Research with families facing cancer: The challenges of accrual and retention
Auteurs : Laurel L. Northouse [États-Unis] ; Tansey Rosset [États-Unis] ; Laurel Phillips [États-Unis] ; Darlene Mood [États-Unis] ; Ann Schafenacker [États-Unis] ; Trace Kershaw [États-Unis]Source :
- Research in Nursing & Health [ 0160-6891 ] ; 2006-06.
English descriptors
- Teeft :
- Accessible pool, Accrual, Attrition, Attrition rate, Attrition rates, Baseline, Biochemical recurrence, Cancer center, Clinical trials, Control group, Data collector, Data collectors, Dyad, Eligibility criteria, Eligible dyads, Eligible patients, Enrollment rate, Experimental group, Family caregivers, Family intervention, Focus program, Group assignment, Intervention group, Large number, Localized, Localized phase, Longitudinal, Longitudinal randomized, Longitudinal studies, Longitudinal study, Male patients, Mcmillian weitzner, Minority patients, Moriarty cotroneo, Northouse, Nursing health, Nursing research, Participant, Project logo, Project manager, Prostate, Prostate cancer, Random assignment, Randomized, Referral, Referral staff, Research site, Research sites, Research staff, Retention, Retention northouse, Retention patterns, Retention rate, Retention rates, Spouse.
Abstract
The purposes of this article are: (a) to describe and analyze the accrual and retention patterns in a longitudinal randomized clinical trial with prostate cancer patients and their partners, and (b) to discuss strategies that were used to overcome challenges in conducting this family‐based study. Initially, 429 dyads were referred to the study. Of these, 166 were not enrolled due to refusal (n = 120) or ineligibility (n = 46), 21 of whom did not meet one or more of the inclusion criteria, and 25 of whom could not be reached within the 2‐month window of eligibility. Of the 383 eligible dyads, 263 dyads were enrolled (enrollment rate of 68.7%). Accrual and retention patterns differed by research site, referral procedures, and phase of prostate cancer. The retention rate was very good with the majority of dyads (n = 218) completing all three follow‐up assessments at 4, 8, and 12 months (82.9%). © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Res Nurs Health 29:199–211, 2006
Url:
DOI: 10.1002/nur.20128
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
- to stream Istex, to step Corpus: 001E11
- to stream Istex, to step Curation: 001D88
- to stream Istex, to step Checkpoint: 001251
- to stream Main, to step Merge: 005544
- to stream Main, to step Curation: 005398
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Research with families facing cancer: The challenges of accrual and retention</title><author><name sortKey="Northouse, Laurel L" sort="Northouse, Laurel L" uniqKey="Northouse L" first="Laurel L." last="Northouse">Laurel L. Northouse</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rosset, Tansey" sort="Rosset, Tansey" uniqKey="Rosset T" first="Tansey" last="Rosset">Tansey Rosset</name></author><author><name sortKey="Phillips, Laurel" sort="Phillips, Laurel" uniqKey="Phillips L" first="Laurel" last="Phillips">Laurel Phillips</name></author><author><name sortKey="Mood, Darlene" sort="Mood, Darlene" uniqKey="Mood D" first="Darlene" last="Mood">Darlene Mood</name></author><author><name sortKey="Schafenacker, Ann" sort="Schafenacker, Ann" uniqKey="Schafenacker A" first="Ann" last="Schafenacker">Ann Schafenacker</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kershaw, Trace" sort="Kershaw, Trace" uniqKey="Kershaw T" first="Trace" last="Kershaw">Trace Kershaw</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:81CEF31DB0C101E3357C81CDC99DA51FA6A623B2</idno><date when="2006" year="2006">2006</date><idno type="doi">10.1002/nur.20128</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/ark:/67375/WNG-NNQXNK94-P/fulltext.pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001E11</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001E11</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">001D88</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">001251</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Checkpoint">001251</idno><idno type="wicri:doubleKey">0160-6891:2006:Northouse L:research:with:families</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Merge">005544</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Curation">005398</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Main/Exploration">005398</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Research with families facing cancer: The challenges of accrual and retention<ref type="note" target="#fn1"></ref></title><author><name sortKey="Northouse, Laurel L" sort="Northouse, Laurel L" uniqKey="Northouse L" first="Laurel L." last="Northouse">Laurel L. Northouse</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><placeName><region type="state">Michigan</region></placeName><wicri:cityArea>University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor</wicri:cityArea></affiliation><affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Rosset, Tansey" sort="Rosset, Tansey" uniqKey="Rosset T" first="Tansey" last="Rosset">Tansey Rosset</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><placeName><region type="state">Michigan</region></placeName><wicri:cityArea>University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor</wicri:cityArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Phillips, Laurel" sort="Phillips, Laurel" uniqKey="Phillips L" first="Laurel" last="Phillips">Laurel Phillips</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><placeName><region type="state">Michigan</region></placeName><wicri:cityArea>University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor</wicri:cityArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Mood, Darlene" sort="Mood, Darlene" uniqKey="Mood D" first="Darlene" last="Mood">Darlene Mood</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><placeName><region type="state">Michigan</region></placeName><wicri:cityArea>Wayne State University College of Nursing, Detroit</wicri:cityArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Schafenacker, Ann" sort="Schafenacker, Ann" uniqKey="Schafenacker A" first="Ann" last="Schafenacker">Ann Schafenacker</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><placeName><region type="state">Michigan</region></placeName><wicri:cityArea>University of Michigan School of Nursing, Ann Arbor</wicri:cityArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kershaw, Trace" sort="Kershaw, Trace" uniqKey="Kershaw T" first="Trace" last="Kershaw">Trace Kershaw</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><placeName><region type="state">Connecticut</region></placeName><wicri:cityArea>Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Yale University, New Haven</wicri:cityArea></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Research in Nursing & Health</title><title level="j" type="alt">RESEARCH IN NURSING AND HEALTH</title><idno type="ISSN">0160-6891</idno><idno type="eISSN">1098-240X</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">29</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">3</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="199">199</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="211">211</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">13</biblScope><publisher>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><pubPlace>Hoboken</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2006-06">2006-06</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0160-6891</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0160-6891</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Accessible pool</term><term>Accrual</term><term>Attrition</term><term>Attrition rate</term><term>Attrition rates</term><term>Baseline</term><term>Biochemical recurrence</term><term>Cancer center</term><term>Clinical trials</term><term>Control group</term><term>Data collector</term><term>Data collectors</term><term>Dyad</term><term>Eligibility criteria</term><term>Eligible dyads</term><term>Eligible patients</term><term>Enrollment rate</term><term>Experimental group</term><term>Family caregivers</term><term>Family intervention</term><term>Focus program</term><term>Group assignment</term><term>Intervention group</term><term>Large number</term><term>Localized</term><term>Localized phase</term><term>Longitudinal</term><term>Longitudinal randomized</term><term>Longitudinal studies</term><term>Longitudinal study</term><term>Male patients</term><term>Mcmillian weitzner</term><term>Minority patients</term><term>Moriarty cotroneo</term><term>Northouse</term><term>Nursing health</term><term>Nursing research</term><term>Participant</term><term>Project logo</term><term>Project manager</term><term>Prostate</term><term>Prostate cancer</term><term>Random assignment</term><term>Randomized</term><term>Referral</term><term>Referral staff</term><term>Research site</term><term>Research sites</term><term>Research staff</term><term>Retention</term><term>Retention northouse</term><term>Retention patterns</term><term>Retention rate</term><term>Retention rates</term><term>Spouse</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The purposes of this article are: (a) to describe and analyze the accrual and retention patterns in a longitudinal randomized clinical trial with prostate cancer patients and their partners, and (b) to discuss strategies that were used to overcome challenges in conducting this family‐based study. Initially, 429 dyads were referred to the study. Of these, 166 were not enrolled due to refusal (n = 120) or ineligibility (n = 46), 21 of whom did not meet one or more of the inclusion criteria, and 25 of whom could not be reached within the 2‐month window of eligibility. Of the 383 eligible dyads, 263 dyads were enrolled (enrollment rate of 68.7%). Accrual and retention patterns differed by research site, referral procedures, and phase of prostate cancer. The retention rate was very good with the majority of dyads (n = 218) completing all three follow‐up assessments at 4, 8, and 12 months (82.9%). © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Res Nurs Health 29:199–211, 2006</div></front></TEI><affiliations><list><country><li>États-Unis</li></country><region><li>Connecticut</li><li>Michigan</li></region></list><tree><country name="États-Unis"><region name="Michigan"><name sortKey="Northouse, Laurel L" sort="Northouse, Laurel L" uniqKey="Northouse L" first="Laurel L." last="Northouse">Laurel L. Northouse</name></region><name sortKey="Kershaw, Trace" sort="Kershaw, Trace" uniqKey="Kershaw T" first="Trace" last="Kershaw">Trace Kershaw</name><name sortKey="Mood, Darlene" sort="Mood, Darlene" uniqKey="Mood D" first="Darlene" last="Mood">Darlene Mood</name><name sortKey="Phillips, Laurel" sort="Phillips, Laurel" uniqKey="Phillips L" first="Laurel" last="Phillips">Laurel Phillips</name><name sortKey="Rosset, Tansey" sort="Rosset, Tansey" uniqKey="Rosset T" first="Tansey" last="Rosset">Tansey Rosset</name><name sortKey="Schafenacker, Ann" sort="Schafenacker, Ann" uniqKey="Schafenacker A" first="Ann" last="Schafenacker">Ann Schafenacker</name></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Lorraine/explor/InforLorV4/Data/Main/Exploration
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 005398 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Main/Exploration/biblio.hfd -nk 005398 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Lorraine
|area= InforLorV4
|flux= Main
|étape= Exploration
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:81CEF31DB0C101E3357C81CDC99DA51FA6A623B2
|texte= Research with families facing cancer: The challenges of accrual and retention
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.33. |  |