Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40295914›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2025

Barriers and strategies for recruitment of pregnant women in contemporary longitudinal birth cohort studies.

Slawa Rokicki, Amulya Gobburu, Melissa Weidner, Nashwah Azam, Michelle Jansen, Zorimar Rivera-Núñez, Adriana De Resende, Veenat Parmar, Gloria Bachmann, Nancy Reilly and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

15 authors.

Slawa RokickiDepartment of Health Behavior, Society and Policy, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA. slawa.rokicki@rutgers.edu.
Amulya GobburuDepartment of Health Behavior, Society and Policy, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Melissa WeidnerDepartment of Pediatrics, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Nashwah AzamDepartment of Health Behavior, Society and Policy, Rutgers School of Public Health, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Michelle JansenCenter for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Zorimar Rivera-NúñezDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Adriana De ResendeEnvironmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Veenat ParmarCenter for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Gloria BachmannDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, US.
Nancy ReillyRutgers Institute for Translational Medicine and Science, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Reynold PanettieriRutgers Institute for Translational Medicine and Science, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Maria Gloria Dominguez-BelloDepartment of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Daniel B HortonDepartment of Pediatrics, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Martin J BlaserCenter for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Emily S BarrettDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.

Funding

Translational Research Support CoreP30ES005022 · NIEHS · UNIV OF MED/DENT NJ-R W JOHNSON MED SCH · PI ROBERT John LAUMBACH · 1988 to 2026
$47.4M
New Jersey ECHOUG3OD035527 · OD · RUTGERS BIOMEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES · PI BARRETT, EMILY S, BLASER, MARTIN J · 2023 to 2024
$3.2M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES005022NIH HHS UG3 OD035527NIH HHS UG3OD035527
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnancy and birth cohort studies are essential for studying the social and biological determinants of human health, yet racial and ethnic minority populations are underrepresented due to low recruitment and retention rates. Remote data collection has potential to improve recruitment of underrepresented populations. The aims of this descriptive qualitative study were to explore the perspectives of pregnant and postpartum women about the barriers and facilitators to enrolling themselves, their child, and their partner in a longitudinal birth cohort study, identify data collection strategies to address barriers, and generate recommendations for future cohort studies.

methodsOnline focus groups and in-person interviews in English and Spanish were conducted between August and November 2022 with pregnant and postpartum women. Participants were recruited from Black and Hispanic serving obstetric clinics and community-based health and social organizations to ensure a racially and ethnically diverse sample. Analysis was conducted using an inductive thematic approach.

results60 women participated in 10 focus groups and 11 interviews. Five themes emerged: challenges in committing time and resources to a research study; utility of compensation and resources; fears that research procedures would negatively impact child; concerns regarding data privacy and children's consent; and benefits for their family, community, and society. Black participants voiced concern about historical discrimination in science and mistrust of research, but also wanted to increase Black representation in research for future generations. Spanish-speaking participants expressed hesitancy related to fear of child injury and misuse of data. Women felt their partners would be reluctant to participate, but that incentives such as parental education would be motivating. Participants liked the flexibility of remote data collection in easing logistical challenges to participation but also expressed importance of personal study contact for facilitating access to resources, enhancing trust in the research process, and motivating retention. Participants also expressed the importance of transparency in data collection procedures and communication on study progress.

conclusionsLeveraging technological advances in remote data collection may reduce some challenges to recruitment of women and families to birth cohort studies. However, building and maintaining trust among communities with engagement, transparency, and communication is critical for recruitment of underrepresented populations.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionPregnant PeopleAdultBirth CohortBlack or African AmericanFemaleFocus GroupsHispanic or LatinoHumansLongitudinal StudiesPregnancyQualitative ResearchYoung AdultBirth cohortHealth equityLongitudinal studyRecruitmentRemote data collection

Identifiers

PMID40295914
PMCPMC12036123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.