Table 1.
Characteristics of 17 Recruitment Efforts Undertaken by the Utah Cancer Registry, 2007–2016
| Study Characteristic | Recruitment Efforts | Cases | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | % | No. | % | |
| Cancer site included | ||||
| Breast | 4 | 23.5 | 5,418 | 54.5 |
| Colorectal | 2 | 11.8 | 2,115 | 21.3 |
| Prostate | 2 | 11.8 | 763 | 7.7 |
| Hematologic or lymphoma | 3 | 17.6 | 833 | 8.4 |
| Other sites and/or multiple sites | 6 | 35.3 | 818 | 8.2 |
| Recruitment packet | ||||
| Type of recruitment packet | ||||
| Permission-to-contact form | 14 | 82.4 | 8,724 | 87.7 |
| Questionnaire | 3 | 17.6 | 1,223 | 12.3 |
| Consent form included in packet | ||||
| No | 15 | 88.2 | 8,989 | 90.4 |
| Yes | 2 | 11.8 | 958 | 9.6 |
| Study brochure included in packeta | ||||
| No | 2,425 | 24.4 | ||
| Yes | 7,522 | 75.6 | ||
| Envelope postage | ||||
| Stamps, outgoing and return | 3 | 17.6 | 6,582 | 66.2 |
| Bulk rate/business reply | 14 | 82.4 | 3,365 | 33.8 |
| Follow-up methods for nonrespondersb,c | ||||
| Days between first and second contactd | ||||
| ≤10 | 5,677 | 74.1 | ||
| ≥11 | 1,982 | 25.9 | ||
| Second contact mode | ||||
| Telephone | 6,594 | 84.9 | ||
| 1,173 | 15.1 | |||
| Study description in recruitment packet | ||||
| Biospecimen collection | ||||
| No | 10 | 58.8 | 8,109 | 81.5 |
| Yes | 7 | 41.2 | 1,838 | 18.5 |
| Future follow-up participation | ||||
| No | 15 | 88.2 | 7,846 | 78.9 |
| Yes | 2 | 11.8 | 2,101 | 21.1 |
| Study also recruiting relatives | ||||
| No | 11 | 64.7 | 2,468 | 24.8 |
| Yes | 6 | 35.3 | 7,479 | 75.2 |
| Offers incentive for participation | ||||
| No | 13 | 76.5 | 9,276 | 93.3 |
| Yes | 4 | 23.5 | 671 | 6.7 |
a Several recruitment protocols were modified while recruitment was active, resulting in variation in brochure use (some individuals received a brochure and others did not). Therefore, individual cases can be classified as having received a brochure or not, but recruitment efforts cannot be clearly classified as yes or no for use of a brochure.
b For both follow-up methods, variables (days between contact and mode of second contact) and values varied across cases within each study, so we cannot classify recruitment efforts in a single category.
c Counts and percentages of cases for the 2 follow-up methods’ variables are based only on the subsample of cases who did not respond to first contact but were subsequently recontacted (n = 7,767).
d The number of cases for days between first and second contact is less than 7,767 due to missing second contact date data for 108 cases.