ArticlePloS one2015
Will Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer Provide Biological Samples for Research Purposes?
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of Response Outcomes for Research Recruitment Through a Central Cancer Registry: Evidence From 17 Recruitment Efforts for Population-Based Studies.American journal of epidemiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about the response rates for biological sample donation and attitudes towards control recruitment, especially in younger women. The goals of this pilot study were to determine in women recently diagnosed with breast cancer, the proportion of cases willing to provide biological samples and for purposes of control recruitment, contact information for friends or colleagues.
methodsA population-based sample of breast cancer cases (n = 417, 25-74 years) was recruited from the Ontario Cancer Registry in 2010 and self-administered questionnaires were completed to determine willingness to provide samples (spot or 24-hr urine, saliva, blood) and contact information for friends/colleagues for control recruitment. Using Χ2 analyses of contingency tables we evaluated if these proportions varied by age group (<45 and 45+) and other factors such as ethnicity, education, income, body mass index (BMI), smoking status and alcohol consumption.
resultsCases were willing to provide blood samples, by visiting a clinic (62%) or by having a nurse visit the home (61%). Moreover, they would provide saliva (73%), and morning or 24-hr urine samples (66% and 52%). Younger cases (≤45) were 3 times (OR) more likely more than older cases to agree to collect morning urine (95% CI: 1.15-8.35). Only 26% of cases indicated they would provide contact information of friends or work colleagues to act as controls. Educated cases were more likely to agree to provide samples, and cases who consumed alcohol were more willing to provide contact information. Ethnicity, income, BMI and smoking had little effect on response rates.
conclusionsReasonable response rates for biological sample collection should be expected in future case controls studies in younger women, but other methods of control selection must be devised.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.