Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21210200›Full record

ArticleMaternal and child health journal2012

Recruitment of healthy first-trimester pregnant women: lessons from the Chemicals, Health & Pregnancy study (CHirP).

Glenys M Webster, Kay Teschke, Patricia A Janssen

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. How to Efficiently Recruit Participants in a Perinatal Cohort Study: CAN-B Cohort Strategies/Lessons Learned.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada : JOGC = Journal d'obstetrique et gynecologie du Canada : JOGC · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Glenys M WebsterSchool of Environmental Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada. gwebster@interchange.ubc.ca
Kay Teschke
Patricia A Janssen

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To describe and evaluate recruitment techniques used to enroll 152 healthy pregnant women fewer than 15 weeks gestation into a prospective study of environmental chemical exposure during pregnancy. Posters, a website, online and print advertising, recruitment emails, media coverage, recruitment from clinic waiting rooms, networking within the pregnancy community and presenting a study booth at baby "trade shows" were used to advertise the study. Participants had to meet a strict set of eligibility criteria, and were asked to donate two-second-trimester blood samples, complete two questionnaires, have samples of air, dust, lint and tap water collected from their homes, and donate a cord blood sample at delivery. Over 17 months, 171 women enrolled (49% of initial contacts, and 99% of all eligible women) and 152 women completed the study (89% retention). Total recruitment costs were approximately $400 Cdn per final participant. Posters, study booth presentations and online advertising generated the most inquiries about the study. Word of mouth, referral from another study and direct email were the most cost-effective strategies. Not surprisingly, the recruited study population was less ethnically diverse, more affluent and more educated than the background population of pregnant women in Vancouver. A combination of passive and active recruitment techniques were successful for recruiting healthy women in roughly the first trimester of pregnancy (<15 weeks gestation). While a convenience sample of women is suitable for our study questions, additional strategies may be required to recruit a more representative pregnant population in future studies.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionPregnant PeopleAdultAdvertisingCanadaCost-Benefit AnalysisEnvironmental ExposureFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPregnancyPregnancy Trimester, FirstProspective StudiesResearchSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.