Table 2.
Source | *No. of referrals/responses (% of total) | Initial target (%) for screening participants by source | +% of total actually screened (estimated) | Judgement on success of strategy |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. NHS | ||||
1 (a) Direct referrals from health care professionals | 55 (3) | 25 | 1 | Largely unsuccessful |
1 (b) Written invitations via GPs to potential participants | 265 (13) | 25 | 11 | Low (5.2%) response rate to letters was resource intensive |
1 (c) Written invitation via diabetes register to diabetes patients (to target their relatives) | 16 | 0 | Unsuccessful | |
1 (d) Search of practice lists for IGT/IFG | 4 | 0 | Unsuccessful | |
Subtotal | 336 (16) | 50 | 12 | Limited success |
2. Community | ||||
2 (a) Via research team contacts, self referrals and 'snowball' effect | > 630 (30) | 47 | Successful particularly in Glasgow, at minimal cost | |
2 (b) Community organisations and recruiters, assisting with recruitment for small payment | 618 (29) | (a), (b) and (c) 50 |
26 | Initially unsuccessful when relying on goodwill, moderately successful when payment offered |
2 (c) Research team recruitment via visits/talks | 480 (23) | 14 | Moderately successful but labour intensive | |
Subtotal | 1728 (82) | 50 | 87 | Successful |
3. Media techniques | ||||
3 (a) Written articles in the press, radio interviews, leaflet and poster distribution, website and e-mail distribution lists | Exact number not known, but few |
Mainly to raise awareness with the expectation of some self-referrals |
0 | Not successful in directly enrolling participants |
3 (b) Ethnic marketing and consultancy company | 25 (1) | 1 | Limited success achieved by fieldwork, not mass marketing | |
Subtotal | > 25 (2) | - | 1 | Unsuccessful |
Totals | > 2089 (100) | 100% | 100% (1319) |
* total number of potentially suitable participants referred to research team or responded to invitation letters for the screening stage
+ 1319 of 2089 referrals were eligible, available and willing to attend a screening visit to have blood glucose measured, percent of total screened is given