ArticleJMIR research protocols2020
Improving Understanding of Participation and Attrition Phenomena in European Cohort Studies: Protocol for a Multi-Situated Qualitative Study.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Uncovering the Role of Neuropsychiatric Symptoms in Cognitive Impairment Progression.Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine · 2025Article
- New French height velocity growth charts: An innovative big-data approach based on routine measurements.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2025Article
- Sociodemographic characteristics and predictive factors of attrition: comparison in two final waves of a birth cohort study in Ecuador.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Article
- Investigating people's attitudes towards participating in longitudinal health research: an intersectionality-informed perspective.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Precision public health in the making: examining the becoming of the "social" in a Swiss environmental health population-based cohort.Frontiers in sociology · 2023Article
- Understanding the Lived Experience of North American Dental Patients With a Single-Tooth Implant in the Upper Front Region of the Mouth: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.JMIR research protocols · 2021Article
- Understanding participation in European cohort studies of preterm children: the views of parents, healthcare professionals and researchers.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Record linkage of population-based cohort data from minors with national register data: a scoping review and comparative legal analysis of four European countries.Open research Europe · 2021Article
- Cohorts as collections of bodies and communities of persons: insights from the SEARCH010/RV254 research cohort.International health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 8 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCohort studies represent a strong methodology for increasing one's understanding of human life-course development and etiological mechanisms. Retention of participants, especially during long follow-up periods, is, however, a major challenge. A better understanding of the motives for participation and attrition in cohort studies in diverse sociogeographic and cultural settings is needed, as this information is most useful in developing effective retention strategies.
objectiveThis study aims to improve our understanding of participation and attrition phenomena in a European cohort study of very preterm/very-low-birth-weight (VPT/VLBW) infants from various sociogeographic and cultural settings to better understand variability and ultimately contribute to developing novel and more "in-context" strategies to improve retention.
methodsThis study uses a triangulation of multisituated methods to collect data on various cohorts in the Research on European Children and Adults Born Preterm (RECAP) network, which include focus group discussions, individual semidriven interviews, and a collaborative, reflexive visual methodology (participant-generated VideoStories) with relevant key actors involved with these cohort studies such as adult participants, parents (caregivers), cohort staff, health care professionals, and academic researchers. The methodological strategy aims to provide a shared flexible framework of various qualitatively driven methods to collect data on VPT/VLBW adult and child cohorts, from which research partners may choose and combine those most pertinent to apply in their own specific contexts. Data from all sources and sites will be submitted to a triangulation of phenomenological thematic analysis with discourse analysis.
resultsAs of January 2020, in this study, we enrolled 92 participants variously involved with child and adult RECAP partnering cohorts from six countries. Multisite enrollment and data collection are expected to be completed in all seven study settings by June 2020. Findings will be reported in future publications.
conclusionsQualitative research methods are a useful complement for enriching and illuminating quantitative results. We expect that opting for a multisituated study approach addressing the interplay of the lived experience of individuals in both researcher and researched stances of particular cohort study settings will contribute to filling some gaps in the understanding of participation variability and effectiveness of different implemented strategies in context. Moreover, health research subjects have traditionally been positioned as passive objects of study rather than active participants, even though they have the greatest stake in improving health care policies and practices. Including collaborative methods allows us to counteract the "top-down" model by handing over some research control to the very people who are providing the data on which research findings will be based while also acknowledging the value of their involvement. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/14997.
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.