Optimising recruitment to a lung cancer screening trial: A comparison of general practitioner and community-based recruitment.
Early detection
cancer screening
community
lung cancer
primary care
randomised controlled trial
recruitment
Journal
Journal of medical screening
ISSN: 1475-5793
Titre abrégé: J Med Screen
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9433359
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Aug 2023
01 Aug 2023
Historique:
medline:
1
8
2023
pubmed:
1
8
2023
entrez:
1
8
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Pre-trial focus groups of the Early detection of Cancer of the Lung Scotland (ECLS) trial indicated that those at high risk of lung cancer are more likely to engage with community-based recruitment methods. The current study aimed to understand if general practitioner (GP) and community-based recruitment might attract different groups of people, and to quantitatively explore the demographic and psychosocial differences between people responding to GP or community-based recruitment. Secondary data analysis of ECLS trial baseline data. Adults (n = 11,164) aged 50 to 75 years completed a baseline questionnaire as part of their participation in the ECLS trial. The questionnaire assessed smoking behaviour, health state, health anxiety and illness perception. Alongside demographic characteristics, how participants were made aware of the study/participant recruitment method (GP recruitment/community recruitment) was also obtained via trial records. The likelihood of being recruited via community-based methods increased as deprivation level decreased. Those recruited via the community had higher levels of perceived personal control of developing lung cancer and were more likely to understand their own risk of developing lung cancer, compared to those who were recruited to the trial via their GP. Health state and health anxiety did not predict recruitment methods in multivariable analysis. Community and opportunistic screening invitations were associated with uptake in people from less-deprived backgrounds, and therefore might not be the optimal method to reach those at high risk of lung cancer and living in more deprived areas.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37525582
doi: 10.1177/09691413231190785
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM