ArticleJournal of immigrant and minority health2022
Strategies to Enhance Retention in a Cohort Study Among Adults of Turkish Descent Living in Berlin.
Article in Journal of immigrant and minority health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recruitment strategies for Turkish immigrants in dementia care research: a scoping review.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Evaluating bias with loss to follow-up in a community-based cohort: empirical investigation from the CARRS Study.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2024Article
- Investigating people's attitudes towards participating in longitudinal health research: an intersectionality-informed perspective.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- The limitations of large-scale volunteer databases to address inequalities and global challenges in health and aging.Nature aging · 2022Review
- Physical Activity Trajectories among Persons of Turkish Descent Living in Germany-A Cohort Study.International journal of environmental research and public 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.
Funding
Abstract
Retention is important for statistical power and external validity in long-term cohort studies. The aims of our study were to evaluate different retention strategies within a cohort study of adults of Turkish descent in Berlin, Germany, and to compare participants and non-participants. In 2011-2012, a population-based study was conducted among adults of Turkish descent to primarily examine recruitment strategies. 6 years later, the participants were re-contacted and invited to complete a self-report questionnaire regarding their health status, health care utilization, and satisfaction with medical services. The retention strategy comprised letters in both German and Turkish, phone calls, and home visits (by bilingual staff). We calculated the response rate and retention rate, using definitions of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, as well as the relative retention rate for each level of contact. Associations of baseline recruitment strategy, sociodemographic, migration-related and health-related factors with retention were investigated by logistic regression analysis. Of 557 persons contacted, 249 (44.7%) completed the questionnaire. This was 50.1% of those whose contact information was available. The relative retention rate was lowest for phone calls (8.9%) and highest for home visits (18.4%). Participants were more often non-smokers and German citizens than non-participants. For all remaining factors, no association with retention was found. In this study, among adults of Turkish descent, the retention rate increased considerably with every additional level of contact. Implementation of comprehensive retention strategies provided by culturally matched study personnel may lead to higher validity and statistical power in studies on migrant health issues.
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.