ArticleAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP2023
Respondent Driven Sampling Method of Recruitment for a Case Control Study of Gastric Cancer Risk.
Article in Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveGastric cancer (GC) disproportionately affects ethnic minorities in the US including Asians and Pacific Islanders. Research with minority groups who are at high risk are needed to provide more effective treatment. Successful recruitment of minorities to research must overcome obstacles of language, access, fear and mistrust. Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS) is a sampling strategy designed to recruit underrepresented minority populations using social networks. However, there are no reports of RDS being used for a case-control study.
methodsOur pilot study examined the feasibility of using RDS as a recruitment strategy to enroll a large number of participants to develop a GC screener. Our preliminary work showed that 750 cases and 5,250 controls would be needed to fully develop this tool. GC cases, who also served as the seeds, were asked to refer 2 more people to participate as controls in our study. Our pilot goal was to recruit 8 GC cases (as seeds) and 112 controls using three waves of referrals and recruitment.
resultsTwenty-seven GC cases were contacted of which 10 refused, 4 expressed interested to participate in the survey but were unwilling to recruit controls. Thirteen cases were recruited but only 5 Complete the survey. Of these 5, 3 cases did not pass on referral coupons and only 2 of the participants gave coupons to 3 potential controls.
conclusionOur study revealed the limitations of using RDS with cancer patients to support recruitment. GC patients' constrained social networks, inadequate incentives or other factors may have contributed to the lack of success with using RDS in this setting.
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.