Reconnecting with urban youth enrolled in a randomized controlled trial and overdue for a 12-month follow-up survey

Abstract

Background Retention of study participants in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is crucial to study validity. Purpose We analyzed the result of four retention strategies used to reconnect with urban teens enrolled in a school-based randomized controlled trial (RCT) and overdue for a 12-month follow-up survey. Methods Traditional retention strategies used to reconnect with teens categorized as “unable to contact” were weekly re-dials of non-working telephone numbers and mailings to the student’s home. Non-traditional retention strategies were obtaining assistance from school administration and communication through Facebook. Results Of the 422 students enrolled, 125 (29.5%) were overdue for a 12-month follow-up survey, but had no working telephone number (unable to contact). We made 196 attempts to contact these 125 students, of which 82 attempts (41.8%) were successful in “reconnecting,” defined as (1) a student contacting research staff as a result of a mailed notice; (2) a research staff member leaving a voicemail at a previously disconnected telephone number; (3) a student responding to Facebook outreach; or (4) research staff obtaining a new telephone number and talking to a person at the new telephone number. We used “ mailed reminder letters” as the referent category, in our analysis. Odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the association between the strategy used and success (“reconnecting”) for telephone number re-dials, Facebook, and school administration assistance were 4.60 (1.8–11.8), 1.94 (1.01–3.73), and 2.91 (0.58–14.50), respectively. Limitations Retention strategies were not applied hierarchically or systematically across students, and we were unable to ascertain student preference for a particular strategy. In addition, our findings may be applicable only to study populations with characteristics similar to those of students included in this study. Conclusion Overall, of the 422 students who enrolled in the study, 380 (90%), ultimately completed the 12-month follow-up survey. A mix of traditional retention strategies, such as telephone number re-dials, and more contemporary methods, such as use of Facebook, were effective in reconnecting with urban teenagers enrolled in a school-based RCT, and controlling attrition during the 12-month follow-up survey period.

Stimulating Intrinsic Motivation in Millennial Students: A New Generation, a New Approach

“…The practice of AST also contributes to the development of IM by providing a rationale for choices (Tai et al, ; Queen and Hess, ), empathizing with the perspectives of students (Ten Cate et al, ; Hickman et al, ), and minimizing the use of controlling language (Mohr et al, ; Lopes et al, ; Meza et al, ) in the teaching environment. These practices provide students with the opportunity to pursue unique individual goals (Woolley and Fishbach, ) and interests (Ezell et al, ; Agius et al, ), and satisfy their needs for autonomy (Woolley and Fishbach, ) and competence (Desy et al, ; Gauer and Jackson, ). It is significant that the practice of AST also benefits students with ingrained low levels of autonomy (Cohn and Lyons, ; Hew and Lo, ) and motivation (Spasenoska et al, ; Melin‐Johansson et al, ; Rotenstein et al, ).…”

“…It is also a cogent fact that, inadequacies in conducive communication skills have been identified as a one of the major causes of frustration (Nuffer et al, ; Khalil et al, ) and loss of IM in health care students (Carpenter et al, ; Melin‐Johansson et al, ; Ebert et al, ). Students have specifically stated that lack of appropriate communication skills have impeded their ability to provide psychosocial support to their clients (Ezell et al, ; Emerson, ; Gibson, ).…”

“…They often remain longer in health care practice to be able to teach and share their knowledge and skills with younger generations (Joshi et al, 2017;Keister et al, 2017;Pape et al, 2018), and tend to focus on the process of education rather than its direct outcomes (Evans and Cuffe, 2009;Abdel Meguid and Khalil, 2017). Although most Traditionalists have now retired (Fleming and Baume, 2006), a significant number are still employed in health care as active clinicians and health policymakers (Ezell et al, 2013;Christensen et al, 2018), and many are founders of modern academic departments (Yilmaz et al, 2016). Since Traditionalists value formality and hierarchy, they are more rigid in their views (Burgess et al, 2015;Tackett et al, 2018) and succeeding generations find them most challenging to work with (Mohr et al, 2011;Christensen et al, 2018;Yang and Shanks, 2018).…”

“…Typically, health care students are idealistic (Rodriguez Zivic et al, 2013;Emerson, 2017) and excited about the choice of their profession (Barie and Ho, 2012;Queen and Hess, 2018;Yang and Shanks, 2018), and hence enter the educational environment with an eagerness to improve the human condition (Delany et al, 2015;Kenney et al, 2018;Melin-Johansson et al, 2018). This enthusiasm should not be misconstrued (Mahoney et al, 2016;Gibson, 2018), but rather nurtured by modifying teaching strategies to make learning more efficient and enjoyable (Ezell et al, 2013;Sluka et al, 2014;Nuffer et al, 2017;Khalil et al, 2018). The succeeding sections present an inductively derived conceptual model to enhance IM in millennial students.…”

“…Cumulative evidence derived from various health care disciplines clearly demonstrates that accurate and early identification of learning styles can directly improve executive functions such as working memory (Cerasoli and Ford, 2014;Jacobs et al, 2015;Pape et al, 2018), cognitive flexibility (Hallin et al, 2015;Tomassini et al, 2016;Raza et al, 2018), and adaptive (Woolley and Fishbach, 2018) and autonomous problemsolving skills (Ezell et al, 2013;Bhagat et al, 2015;Gauer and Jackson, 2018). The recognition of individual learning styles in medical and dental students, has been particularly beneficial during the teaching of anatomy, where students were able to function with lesser instructions (Palmen et al, 2015;Joshi et al, 2017;Oommen et al, 2017;Chung et al, 2018;Mestdagh et al, 2018) and develop effective (Wilkinson et al, 2014;Tai et al, 2016) and self-regulated (Gurpinar et al, 2010;Haro et al, 2014) study habits.…”