3.8 Article

Recruitment and enrollment of rural and urban medically underserved elderly into a randomized trial of telemedicine case management for diabetes care

Journal

TELEMEDICINE JOURNAL AND E-HEALTH
Volume 12, Issue 5, Pages 601-607

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2006.12.601

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Our goal was to identify reasons for enrollment or refusal to participate in a randomized trial of telemedicine case management of diabetes. We performed a prospective survey of participants and non-participants during recruitment for the Informatics for Diabetes Education and Telemedicine (IDEATel) study, a randomized trial of telemedicine case management of diabetes mellitus in medically underserved elderly. There were two recruitment areas: urban New York City, and rural upstate New York. A Participant Questionnaire (PQ) was administered at the baseline IDEATel visit, and a Non-Participant Questionnaire (NPQ) was administered during the recruitment telephone call. Both questionnaires listed possible responses; subjects could choose more than one response or give their own. Of 1,660 IDEATel participants, 99.7% completed the PQ. Most frequent reason for participation was the belief that the technology could help them (52% and 42% of urban and rural respondents, respectively). Of the 2,231 subjects refusing participation, 28% answered the NPQ (90% of respondents were from rural area). Most frequent reasons not to participate in the rural area were being too busy (23%), and discomfort with the technology (22%), and in the urban area the belief that the technology could not help them (71%), discomfort with it ( 52%), and not liking to participate in studies (52%). In multivariate analysis ( rural respondents only), knowing how to use a computer was an independent predictor of participation ( p < 0.001). In conclusion, perceptions and beliefs regarding technology, including the expectation to benefit from it, played an important role in the decision to participate.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available