These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Recruiting ethnically diverse general internal medicine patients for a telephone survey on physician-patient communication.
    Author: Nápoles-Springer AM, Santoyo J, Stewart AL.
    Journal: J Gen Intern Med; 2005 May; 20(5):438-43. PubMed ID: 15963168.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists on the effectiveness of recruitment methods among diverse populations. OBJECTIVE: Describe response rates by recruitment stage, ethnic-language group, and type of initial contact letter (for African-American and Latino patients). DESIGN: Tracking of response status by recruitment stage and ethnic-language group and a randomized trial of ethnically tailored initial letters nested within a cross-sectional telephone survey on physician-patient communication. PARTICIPANTS: Adult general medicine patients with >or=1 visit during the preceding year, stratified by 4 categories: African-American (N= 1,400), English-speaking Latino (N= 894), Spanish-speaking Latino (N= 965), and non-Latino white (N= 1,400). MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Ethnically tailored initial letters referred to shortages of African-American (or Latino) physicians and the need to learn about the experiences of African-American (or Latino) patients communicating with physicians. Of 2,482 patients contacted, eligible, and able to participate (identified eligibles), 69.9% completed the survey. Thirty-nine percent of the sampling frame was unable to be contacted, with losses higher among non-Latino whites (46.5%) and African Americans (44.2%) than among English-speaking (32.3%) and Spanish-speaking Latinos (25.1%). For identified eligibles, response rates were highest among Spanish-speaking Latinos (75.2%), lowest for non-Latino whites (66.4%), and intermediate for African Americans (69.7%) and English-speaking Latinos (68.1%). There were no differences in overall response rates between patients receiving ethnically tailored letters (72.2%) and those receiving general letters (70.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Household contact and individual response rates differed by ethnic-language group, highlighting the importance of tracking losses by stage and subpopulation. Careful attention to recruitment yielded acceptable response rates among all groups.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]