• Respiratory care · Sep 2020

    Review

    Participant Retention in Follow-Up Studies of Acute Respiratory Failure Survivors.

    • Krishidhar Nunna, Awsse Al-Ani, Roozbeh Nikooie, FriedmanLisa AronsonLAOutcomes After Critical Illness and Surgery Group, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland., Vaishnavi Raman, Zerka Wadood, Sumana Vasishta, Elizabeth Colantuoni, Dale M Needham, and Victor D Dinglas.
    • Department of Critical Care Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
    • Respir Care. 2020 Sep 1; 65 (9): 138213911382-1391.

    BackgroundWith an increasing number of follow-up studies of acute respiratory failure survivors, there is need for a better understanding of participant retention and its reporting in this field of research. Hence, our objective was to synthesize participant retention data and associated reporting for this field.MethodsTwo screeners independently searched for acute respiratory failure survivorship studies within a published scoping review to evaluate subject outcomes after hospital discharge in critical illness survivors.ResultsThere were 21 acute respiratory failure studies (n = 4,342 survivors) over 47 follow-up time points. Six-month follow-up (range: 2-60 months) was the most frequently reported time point, in 81% of studies. Only 1 study (5%) reported accounting for loss to follow-up in sample-size calculation. Retention rates could not be calculated for 5 (24%) studies. In 16 studies reporting on retention across all time points, retention ranged from 32% to 100%. Pooled retention rates at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months were 85%, 89%, 82%, and 88%, respectively. Retention rates did not significantly differ by publication year, participant mean age, or when comparing earlier (3 months) versus each later follow-up time point (6, 12, or 24 months).ConclusionsParticipant retention was generally high but varied greatly across individual studies and time points, with 24% of studies reporting inadequate data to calculate retention rate. High participant retention is possible, but resources for optimizing retention may help studies retain participants. Improved reporting guidelines with greater adherence would be beneficial.Copyright © 2020 by Daedalus Enterprises.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.