Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 2;11(5):1066–1077. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibab010

Table 2.

Study reach and sample representativeness by adopting clinics

Clinic Number of physicians engageda EHR eligible N (%)b Recruitment mailers sent n (%) Telephone screened
n (%)
In-person screened
n (%)
Eligible patients
n (%)
Minority n (%)c Older adults n (%)c Female
n (%)c
Reach by clinic n (%)d
A 5 1,340 (12) 1,175 (88) 380 (32) 190 (50) 90 (47) 9 (10) 18 (20) 44 (49) 89 (23)
B 9 1,514 (13) 1,478 (98) 401 (27) 196 (49) 102 (52) 1 (1) 21 (201) 68 (67) 102 (25)
C 6 631 (6) 631 (100) 153 (24) 53 (35) 27 (51) 8 (32) 6 (24) 19 (76) 25 (16)
D 3 1,006 (9) 990 (98) 208 (21) 128 (62) 71 (56) 5 (8) 14 (21) 39 (59) 66 (32)
E 4 1,020 (9) 1,000 (98) 248 (25) 143 (58) 91 (64) 1 (1) 22 (25) 57 (66) 87 (35)
F 5 777 (7) 759 (98) 194 (26) 120 (62) 47 (39) 0 15 (33) 30 (67) 45 (23)
G 36 4,532 (40) 4,249 (94) 1,075 (25) 497 (46) 169 (34) 23 (15) 47 (31) 79 (52) 153 (14)
H 3 493 (4) 487 (99) 137 (28) 85 (62) 33 (39) 1 (3) 7 (22) 32 (100) 32 (23)

Values in parentheses are proportions for which the denominator equals the n indicated in the preceding cell of the respective row, unless otherwise specified.

EHR electronic health record.

aPhysicians engaged (n = 58) were not mutually exclusive across clinics.

b% of patients from each clinic relative to the total sampling pool identified in the EHR query.

c% of participants of the indicated classification relative to the total enrolled sample from the respective clinic.

d% of patients that completed phone screening who were subsequently enrolled.