Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23107387›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity2012

Recruiting and engaging new mothers in nutrition research studies: lessons from the Australian NOURISH randomised controlled trial.

Lynne A Daniels, Jacinda L Wilson, Kimberley M Mallan, Seema Mihrshahi, Rebecca Perry, Jan M Nicholson, Anthea Magarey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
12.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Bidirectional associations between mothers' feeding practices and child eating behaviours.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2018
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Informing a healthy eating and physical activity program to decrease postnatal weight retention: What are women experiencing and what type of program do they want?Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2023
    Article
  19. Trial collaborators' perceptions of the process of delivering Healthy Beginnings advice via telephone calls or text messages.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2022
    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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lynne A DanielsSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane 4059, Australia. l2.daniels@qut.edu.au
Jacinda L Wilson
Kimberley M Mallan
Seema Mihrshahi
Rebecca Perry
Jan M Nicholson
Anthea Magarey
Flinders University · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUParenting Research Centre · AUUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite important implications for the budgets, statistical power and generalisability of research findings, detailed reports of recruitment and retention in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are rare. The NOURISH RCT evaluated a community-based intervention for first-time mothers that promoted protective infant feeding practices as a primary prevention strategy for childhood obesity. The aim of this paper is to provide a detailed description and evaluation of the recruitment and retention strategies used.

methodsA two stage recruitment process designed to provide a consecutive sampling framework was used. First- time mothers delivering healthy term infants were initially approached in postnatal wards of the major maternity services in two Australian cities for consent to later contact (Stage 1). When infants were approximately four months old mothers were re-contacted by mail for enrolment (Stage 2), baseline measurements (Time 1) and subsequent random allocation to the intervention or control condition. Outcomes were assessed at infant ages 14 months (Time 2) and 24 months (Time 3).

resultsAt Stage 1, 86% of eligible mothers were approached and of these women, 76% consented to later contact. At Stage 2, 3% had become ineligible and 76% could be recontacted. Of the latter, 44% consented to full enrolment and were allocated. This represented 21% of mothers screened as eligible at Stage 1. Retention at Time 3 was 78%. Mothers who did not consent or discontinued the study were younger and less likely to have a university education.

conclusionsThe consent and retention rates of our sample of first time mothers are comparable with or better than other similar studies. The recruitment strategy used allowed for detailed information from non-consenters to be collected; thus selection bias could be estimated. Recommendations for future studies include being able to contact participants via mobile phone (particularly text messaging), offering home visits to reduce participant burden and considering the use of financial incentives to support participant retention.

trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Number ACTRN12608000056392.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionProgram EvaluationAdultAge FactorsCommunicationEducational StatusFeeding BehaviorFemaleHouse CallsHumansInfantInfant FoodMothersMotivationObesityPrimary Prevention

Identifiers

PMID23107387
PMCPMC3507820
OpenAlexW2109997301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.