Description and initial evaluation of incorporating electronic follow-up of study participants in a longstanding multisite cohort study

Kiarri N. Kershaw*, Kiang Liu, David C. Goff, Donald M. Lloyd-Jones, Laura J. Rasmussen-Torvik, Jared P. Reis, Pamela J. Schreiner, Daniel B. Garside, Stephen Sidney

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate a pilot program that allowed Chicago field center participants of the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study to submit follow-up information electronically (eCARDIA). Methods: Chicago field center participants who provided email addresses were invited to complete contact information and follow-up questionnaires on medical conditions electronically in 2012-2013. Sociodemographic characteristics were compared between those who did and did not complete follow-up electronically. The number of participant contacts by CARDIA staff needed before follow-up was completed was also evaluated. Results: Blacks and low socioeconomic position individuals were less likely to complete follow-up using the electronic questionnaire. Participants who used the electronic questionnaire for follow-up needed fewer contacts (e.g., median 1 contact compared with 3for contact information follow-up), but they also needed fewer contacts prior to eCARDIA (median 1 before and after eCARDIA). Conclusions: Findings suggest other approaches will be needed to maintain contact and elicit follow-up information from harder-to-reach individuals.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number125
JournalBMC Medical Research Methodology
Volume16
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 23 2016

Keywords

  • Cohort studies
  • Epidemiology
  • Pilot projects

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology
  • Health Informatics

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Description and initial evaluation of incorporating electronic follow-up of study participants in a longstanding multisite cohort study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this