Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33766723›Full record

ArticleNeurotoxicology and teratology

Recruitment and retention of pregnant women in prospective birth cohort studies: A scoping review and content analysis of the literature.

Ellen Goldstein, Ludmila N Bakhireva, Kendra Nervik, Shelbey Hagen, Alyssa Turnquist, Aleksandra E Zgierska, Lidia Enriquez Marquez, Ryan McDonald, Jamie Lo, Christina Chambers

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Neurotoxicology and teratology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  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

10 authors.

Ellen GoldsteinDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Wisconsin, School of Medicine and Public Health, 1100 Delaplaine Ct, Madison, WI 53715, United States of America. Electronic address: Egoldstein5@wisc.edu.
Ludmila N BakhirevaCollege of Pharmacy Substance Use Research and Education (SURE) Center, United States of America; Department of Family and Community Medicine, United States of America; Division of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Preventive Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, 1 University of New Mexico, MSC 09 5360, Albuquerque, NM 87131, United States of America. Electronic address: lbakhireva@salud.unm.edu.
Kendra NervikDepartment of Sociology, University of Wisconsin, 8128 William H. Sewell Social Sciences Building, 1180 Observatory Drive, Madison, WI 53706-1393, United States of America. Electronic address: Nervik@wisc.edu.
Shelbey HagenDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Wisconsin, School of Medicine and Public Health, 1100 Delaplaine Ct, Madison, WI 53715, United States of America. Electronic address: shelbey.hagen@fammed.wisc.edu.
Alyssa TurnquistDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Wisconsin, School of Medicine and Public Health, 1100 Delaplaine Ct, Madison, WI 53715, United States of America. Electronic address: alyssa.turnquist@fammed.wisc.edu.
Aleksandra E ZgierskaDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Pennsylvania State University, College of Medicine, United States of America. Electronic address: azgierska@pennstatehealth.psu.edu.
Lidia Enriquez MarquezCollege of Pharmacy Substance Use Research and Education (SURE) Center, United States of America. Electronic address: lenriquezmarquez@salud.unm.edu.
Ryan McDonaldDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health McConnell Hall, 1010 Mound Street, Madison, WI 53715, United States of America. Electronic address: rcmcdonald@wisc.edu.
Jamie LoDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, L466, Portland, OR 97239, United States of America. Electronic address: loj@ohsu.edu.
Christina ChambersDepartments of Pediatrics and Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, MC0828, La Jolla, CA 92093, United States of America. Electronic address: chchambers@health.ucsd.edu.

Funding

University of Wisconsin Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR002373 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI ELIZABETH S BURNSIDE, Allan R. Brasier · 2017 to 2026
$75.9M
13/24 The Healthy Brain and Child Development National ConsortiumU01DA055361 · NIDA · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI Koraly E Perez-Edgar, Aleksandra Ewa Zgierska · 2021 to 2026
$7.8M
The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on alcohol use and psycho-somatic health in pregnant and postpartum women with intersecting vulnerabilities.R01AA021771 · NIAAA · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI BAKHIREVA, LUDMILA NICOLE · 2013 to 2022
$6.5M
4/6 Planning for the HEALthy Early Development StudyR34DA050341 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI CHAMBERS, CHRISTINA · 2019 to 2020
$917k
Biological and Environmental Contributions to Healthy Baby Development in Diverse PopulationR34DA050254 · NIDA · CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF LOS ANGELES · PI LEVITT, PAT · 2019 to 2020
$741k
6/6 Planning for the HEALthy Early Development StudyR34DA050237 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI BAKHIREVA, LUDMILA NICOLE, LEEMAN, LAWRENCE M · 2019 to 2019
$542k
1/3 Promoting Resilience in Children: Protocol Development for a Birth Cohort Study To Assess Factors Impacting NeurodevelopmentR34DA050270 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI GOLDSTEIN, ELLEN, ZGIERSKA, ALEKSANDRA EWA · 2019 to 2019
$523k
2/3; Promoting resilience in children: Protocol Development for a Birth Cohort Study to Access Factors Impacting NeurodevelopmentR34DA050263 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI OSSORIO, PILAR N. · 2019 to 2019
$514k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002373NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA021771NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA050237NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA050254NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA050263NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA050270NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA050341NIDA NIH HHS U01 DA055361
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Longitudinal cohort studies present unique methodological challenges, especially when they focus on vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the existing knowledge on recruitment and retention (RR) of pregnant women in birth cohort studies and to make recommendations for researchers to improve research engagement of this population. A scoping review and content analysis were conducted to identify facilitators and barriers to the RR of pregnant women in cohort studies. The search retrieved 574 articles, with 38 meeting eligibility criteria and focused on RR among English-speaking, adult women, who are pregnant or in early postpartum period, enrolled in birth cohort studies. Selected studies were birth cohort (including longitudinal) (n = 20), feasibility (n = 14), and other (n = 4) non-interventional study designs. The majority were from low-risk populations. Abstracted data were coded according to emergent theme clusters. The majority of abstracted data (79%) focused on recruitment practices, with only 21% addressing retention strategies. Overall, facilitators were reported more often (75%) than barriers (25%). Building trusting relationships and employing diverse recruitment methods emerged as major recruitment facilitators; major barriers included heterogeneous participant reasons for refusal and cultural factors. Key retention facilitators included flexibility with scheduling, frequent communication, and culturally sensitive practices, whereas participant factors such as loss of interest, pregnancy loss, relocation, multiple caregiver shifts, and substance use/psychiatric problems were cited as major barriers. Better understanding of facilitators and barriers of RR can help enhance the internal and external validity of future birth/pre-birth cohorts. Strategies presented in this review can help inform investigators and funding agencies of best practices for RR of pregnant women in longitudinal studies.

Indexed as

Birth CohortPatient SelectionPregnancyFemaleHumansProspective StudiesBarriersBirth cohortFacilitatorsPregnant womenRecruitmentRetention

Identifiers

PMID33766723
PMCPMC8137666

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.