Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21264502›Full record

ArticleJournal of behavioral medicine2011

Use of voter registration records to recruit a representative sample.

Erika H Westling, Sarah E Hampson, Lisa A Strycker, Deborah J Toobert

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of behavioral medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Erika H WestlingOregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR 97403-1983, USA. erikaw@ori.org
Sarah E Hampson
Lisa A Strycker
Deborah J Toobert

Funding

Methods for Improved Diet & Exercise MeasurementR01CA114579 · NCI · OREGON RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI TOOBERT, DEBORAH J · 2006 to 2008
$1.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA114579NCI NIH HHS R01 CA114579-01A1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research samples are not often compared to broader community samples to evaluate their representativeness, a critical factor in determining the generalizability of study findings. This study evaluated the use of voter-registration records for recruiting a representative sample of community-dwelling, older, and overweight participants for research on improving measures of diet and physical activity. County voter-registration records were used to identify individuals between 45 and 75 years of age and living in the two cities closest to the research lab. The data were collected from July, 2007 through November, 2008. Prospective participants were mailed an introductory letter and opt-out postcard, and received a follow-up recruitment phone call in which they underwent further screening if interested in participating. The representativeness of the final voter-recruited sample (N = 191) was evaluated by comparisons of demographic variables with Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data at the county and state levels. The voter-recruited sample was only partially comparable to that of the BRFSS sample, with expected differences in variables related to race/ethnicity, the proportion of women, employment status, and educational attainment. Voter-registration records are a relatively low-cost ($75 per participant) method of recruiting a community sample that avoids some biases of other recruitment methods, but may not achieve a fully representative sample.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionRegistriesResearch DesignAgedBehavioral Risk Factor Surveillance SystemFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor ActivityObesityPoliticsSampling StudiesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID21264502
PMCPMC3832354

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.