The significant impact of education, poverty, and race on Internet-based research participant engagement
Sarah M Hartz, Tiffany Quan, Abiye Ibiebele, Sherri L Fisher, Emily Olfson, Patricia Salyer, Laura J Bierut, Sarah M Hartz, Tiffany Quan, Abiye Ibiebele, Sherri L Fisher, Emily Olfson, Patricia Salyer, Laura J Bierut
Abstract
Purpose: Internet-based technologies are increasingly being used for research studies. However, it is not known whether Internet-based approaches will effectively engage participants from diverse racial and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Methods: A total of 967 participants were recruited and offered genetic ancestry results. We evaluated viewing Internet-based genetic ancestry results among participants who expressed high interest in obtaining the results.
Results: Of the participants, 64% stated that they were very or extremely interested in their genetic ancestry results. Among interested participants, individuals with a high school diploma (n = 473) viewed their results 19% of the time relative to 4% of the 145 participants without a diploma (P < 0.0001). Similarly, 22% of participants with household income above the federal poverty level (n = 286) viewed their results relative to 10% of the 314 participants living below the federal poverty level (P < 0.0001). Among interested participants both with a high school degree and living above the poverty level, self-identified Caucasians were more likely to view results than self-identified African Americans (P < 0.0001), and females were more likely to view results than males (P = 0.0007).
Conclusion: In an underserved population, engagement in Internet-based research was low despite high reported interest. This suggests that explicit strategies should be developed to increase diversity in Internet-based research.Genet Med 19 2, 240-243.
Figures
References
- Advisory Committee to the NIH Director. Digital health data in a million-person precision medicine initiative cohort. National Institutes of Health; 2015. .
- Hudson K, Lifton R, Patrick-Lake B. The precision medicine initiative cohort program-building a research foundation for 21st century medicine. In: Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI) Working Group Report to the Advisory Committee to the Director, ed; 2015. .
- Anderson N, Bragg C, Hartzler A, Edwards K. Participant-Centric Initiatives: Tools to Facilitate Engagement In Research. Appl Transl Genom 2012;1:25–29.
- Kaye J, Curren L, Anderson N, et al. From patients to partners: participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research. Nat Rev Genet 2012;13:371–376.
- Overby CL, Maloney KA, Alestock TD, et al. Prioritizing approaches to engage community members and build trust in biobanks: a survey of attitudes and opinions of adults within outpatient practices at the University of Maryland. J Pers Med 2015;5:264–279.
- Kuang H, Jin S, Thomas T, et al.; Reproductive Medicine Network. Predictors of participant retention in infertility treatment trials. Fertil Steril 2015;104:1236–43.e1.
- Couper MP, Alexander GL, Zhang N, et al. Engagement and retention: measuring breadth and depth of participant use of an online intervention. J Med Internet Res 2010;12:e52.
- Perrin A, Duggin M. American's Internet Access: 2000–2015. Pew Research Center; 2015. .
- Anderson M. Technology Device Ownership: 2015. . PEW Research Center; 2015.
- Bass PF 3rd, Wilson JF, Griffith CH. A shortened instrument for literacy screening. J Gen Intern Med 2003;18:1036–1038.
- US Census Bureau. 2010–2014 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. American FactFinder. Tables generated by Sarah Hartz: . Accessed 22 February 2016.
- Smith JC, Medalia C. Health insurance coverage in the United States: 2014. US Department of Commerce EaSA; 2015.
- Yancey AK, Ortega AN, Kumanyika SK. Effective recruitment and retention of minority research participants. Annu Rev Public Health 2006;27:1–28.
- Nicholson LM, Schwirian PM, Klein EG, et al. Recruitment and retention strategies in longitudinal clinical studies with low-income populations. Contemp Clin Trials 2011;32:353–362.
Source: PubMed