Factors Associated With Attrition in Randomized Controlled Trials of Vocal Rehabilitation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Moreira, Taís de Campos; Gadenz, Camila Dalbosco; Capobianco, Dirce Maria; Figueiró, Luciana Rizzieri; Ferigolo, Maristela; Vissoci, J.R.N.; Barros, Helena M.T.; Cassol, Mauricéia; Pietrobon, Ricardo

doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.05.014

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding feasibility, the intervention components had high completion rates, with 7595% of participants completing the initial educational module and final assessment and feedback. This is comparable to rates in a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of vocal rehabilitation 38 , which found an 85% average completion rate, with higher-quality studies having the highest rates (range = 20% to 90%). Participants in the present study also completed more than half (56%) of the available additional present perceived control exercises on average.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Web-Based Perceived Present Control Intervention for Voice Disorders: A Pilot Study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 71%

Web-Based Perceived Present Control Intervention for Voice Disorders: A Pilot Study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Por otro lado, el rigor metodológico del EC también puede llevar a deserción de los participantes, dadas las múltiples improvisaciones que se puedan presentar en el desarrollo de estos estudios; en este sentido, también se ha comprobado que, en algunos EC la tasa de abandono es mayor cuando dichos estudios son de menor calidad metodológica o cuando presentan errores técnicos, más que por los efectos propios de los tratamientos (69).…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Ensayos clínicos explicativos y pragmáticos

Rico

2023

Acta Med Col

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introducción: los ensayos clínicos son estudios experimentales cuyo resultado puede conduciral mejor nivel de evidencia esperado para la práctica en salud; sin embargo, sus diseños presentan numerosas variantes metodológicas necesarias para garantizar el cumplimiento de sus objetivos. Objetivo: describir los aspectos metodológicos a tener en cuenta en el diseño de los ensayos clínicos explicativos y pragmáticos. Material y métodos: revisión de literatura que incluyó manuscritos publicados entre los años 2016-2020, artículos originales o de revisión que describieran aspectos metodológicos de los ensayos clínicos. La búsqueda y selección se realizó en Google Scholar, Scopus y Pubmed, obteniendo un total de 47 manuscritos para el análisis. Resultados: seis aspectos metodológicos relevantes muestran diferencias en el diseño de los ensayos clínicos en cuanto a: el propósito y objetivo, reclutamiento de los participantes, asignación de participantes, enmascaramiento y/o cegamiento, análisis de los datos obtenidos, validez interna y externa. Conclusión: ambas formas de ensayos clínicos muestran actualmente beneﬁcios y barreras por sortear para su desarrollo en el ámbito clínico; es indispensable que los investigadores en salud, conozcan en detalle sus requerimientos metodológicos, con el objetivo de poder realizar de una manera más acertada este tipo de estudios.

show abstract

“…Characteristics of individuals experiencing attrition are an important consideration with respect to study validity. 7Some studies have found males and younger participants more likely to experience attrition (8)(9)(10)(11). Other studies have found social factors such as lower educational and income level to be associated with higher attrition (11).…”

Section: Page 4/17mentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Retention of Community-recruited Participants in HIV Prevention Research Through Saturday Household Visits; Findings from the HPTN 071 (PopART) Study in South Africa.

Bell‐Mandla

Sloot

Maarman

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIdentifying successful strategies to improve participant retention in longitudinal studies remains a challenge. In this study we evaluated whether non-traditional fieldworker shifts (after hours during the week and weekends) enhanced participant retention when compared to retention during traditional weekday shifts in the HPTN 071 (PopART) population cohort (PC). MethodsHPTN 071 (PopART) PC participants were recruited and followed up in their homes on an annual basis by research fieldworkers over a 3-4 year period. The average number of successful follow-up visits, where a PC participant was found and retained in the study, was calculated for each of 3 visit schedules (early weekday shift, late weekday shift, and Saturday shift), and standardized to account for variation in fieldwork shift duration. We used one-way univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA) to describe differences in mean-successful visits and 95% confidence intervals between the shift types.ResultsData on 16651 successful visits were included. Successful visit rates were higher when conducting Saturday visits (14.0; 95% CI: 11.3-16.6) compared to both regular (4.5; 95% CI: 3.7-5.3) and late weekday shifts (5.3; 95% CI: 4.7-5.8) overall and in all subgroup analyses (P<0.001). The successful visit rate was higher amongst women than men were during all shift types (3.2 vs. 1.3, p<0.001). Successful visit rates by shift type did not differ significantly by age, over time, by PC round or by community triplet. ConclusionThe number of people living with HIV continues to increase annually. High quality evidence from longitudinal studies remains critical for evaluating HIV prevention and treatment strategies. This study showed a significant benefit on participant retention through introduction of Saturday shifts for home visits and these data can make an important contribution to the emerging body of evidence for improving retention in longitudinal research. Trial registrationPopART was approved by the Stellenbosch University Health Research Ethics Committees (N12/11/074), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (6326) ethics committee and the Division of AIDS (DAIDS) (Protocol ID 11865). PopART was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number NCT01900977).

show abstract

Factors Associated With Attrition in Randomized Controlled Trials of Vocal Rehabilitation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cited by 8 publications

References 76 publications

Web-Based Perceived Present Control Intervention for Voice Disorders: A Pilot Study

Web-Based Perceived Present Control Intervention for Voice Disorders: A Pilot Study

Ensayos clínicos explicativos y pragmáticos

Improving Retention of Community-recruited Participants in HIV Prevention Research Through Saturday Household Visits; Findings from the HPTN 071 (PopART) Study in South Africa.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About