RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The focus of this study was to calculate and contextualize response rates for a community-based study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, a topic on which scant data exist, and to share lessons learned from recruiting and enrolling for implementation of future studies. DESIGN: The Life+Health Study, a cross-sectional population-based study designed to advance novel methods to measure and analyze multiple forms of discrimination for population health research. SETTING: The study recruited participants from 3 community health centers in Boston, Massachusetts, between May 2020 and July 2022. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 699 adult participants between the ages of 25 and 64 years who were born in the United States and had visited one of the health centers within the last 2 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The response rate was calculated as follows: (number of completions + number of dropouts)/(dropouts + enrollments). To contextualize this response rate, we synthesized evidence pertaining to local COVID-19 case counts, sociopolitical events, pandemic-related restrictions and project protocol adjustments, and examples of interactions with patients. RESULTS: Our study had a lower-than-expected response rate (48.4%), with the lowest rates from the community health centers serving primarily low-income patients of color. Completion rates were lower during periods of higher COVID-19 case counts. We describe contextual factors that led to challenges and lessons learned from recruiting during the pandemic, including the impact of US sociopolitical events. CONCLUSIONS: The Life+Health Study concluded recruitment during the pandemic with a lower-than-expected response rate, as also reported in 4 other US publications focused on the impact of COVID-19 on response rates in community-based studies. Our results provide an example of the impact of the pandemic and related US sociopolitical events on response rates that can serve as a framework for contextualizing other research conducted during the pandemic and highlight the importance of best practices in research recruitment with underserved populations.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Boston/epidemiologia , Estudos Transversais , Centros Comunitários de SaúdeRESUMO
Recent studies showed that implicit measures are valuable instruments for assessing exposure to discrimination and predicting negative physical conditions. Between March 10, 2020, and April 1, 2020, we conducted three experiments (577 participants) in the USA to evaluate the use of group-specific vs. general race/ethnicity categories in implicit measures of discrimination. We measured implicit discrimination and attitudes towards the general race/ethnicity category "people of color" (POC) and two specific race/ethnicity categories (i.e., "Black people" and "Hispanic people"). Implicit discrimination and attitudes were assessed using the Brief Implicit Association Test (B-IAT). Among participants (mean age = 37, standard deviation = 10.5), 50% identified as White non-Hispanic (NH), 33.3% as Black NH, and 16.7% as Hispanic; 71.7% were female and 72.2% had a bachelor's degree or higher. We found an implicit discrimination towards target groups and an in-group preference among all participant groups only when specific race/ethnicity categories were used in the B-IAT. When the general category POC was used, we observed a discrimination towards POC only for Black NH participants, while White NH participants showed no discrimination. Similarly, Black NH participants showed no in-group preference for POC, but did show an in-group preference for Black people. These results suggest that using the category POC in implicit measures may be inappropriate when evaluating discrimination and attitudes towards Black and Hispanic individuals as it may not capture specific experiences of discrimination and identity in these groups.