Impact and costs of targeted recruitment of minorities to the National Lung Screening Trial.
BACKGROUND
To promote results in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) that are generalizable across the entire US population, a subset of NLST sites developed dedicated strategies for minority recruitment.


OBJECTIVE
To report the effects of targeted strategies on the accrual of underrepresented groups, to describe participant characteristics, and to estimate the costs of targeted enrollment.


METHODS
The 2002-2004 Tobacco Use Supplement was used to estimate eligible proportions of racial and ethnic categories. Strategic planning included meetings/conferences with key stakeholders and minority organizations. Potential institutions were selected based upon regional racial/ethnic diversity and proven success in recruitment of underrepresented groups. Seven institutions submitted targeted recruitment strategies with budgets. Accrual by racial/ethnic category was tracked for each institution. Cost estimates were based on itemized receipts for minority strategies relative to minority accrual.


RESULTS
Of 18,842 participants enrolled, 1576 (8.4%) were minority participants. The seven institutions with targeted recruitment strategies accounted for 1223 (77.6%) of all minority participants enrolled. While there was a significant increase in the rate of minority accrual pre-implementation to post-implementation for the institutions with targeted recruitment (9.3% vs. 15.2%, p <  0.0001), there was no significant difference for the institutions without (3.5% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.46). Minority enrollees at the seven institutions tended to have less than a high school education, be economically disadvantaged, and were more often uninsured. These socio-demographic differences persisted at the seven institutions even after adjusting for race and ethnicity. The success of different strategies varied by institution, and no one strategy was successful across all institutions. Costs for implementation were also highly variable, ranging from $146 to $749 per minority enrollee.


CONCLUSIONS
Data on minority recruitment processes were not consistently kept at the individual institutions. In addition, participant responses via newspaper advertisements and the efforts of minority staff hired by the institutions could not be coded on Case Report Forms.


CONCLUSIONS
Strategic efforts were associated with significant increases in minority enrollment. The greatest successes require that a priori goals be established based on eligible racial/ethnic proportions; the historical performance of sites in minority accrual should factor into the selection of sites; recruitment planning must begin well in advance of trial launch; and there must be endorsement by prominent representatives of the racial groups of interest.
David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Catherine
C
Duda
Irene
I
Mahon
Mei Hsiu
MH
Chen
Bradley
B
Snyder
Richard
R
Barr
Caroline
C
Chiles
Robert
R
Falk
Elliot K
EK
Fishman
David
D
Gemmel
Jonathan G
JG
Goldin
Kathleen
K
Brown
Reginald F
RF
Munden
Kay
K
Vydareny
Denise R
DR
Aberle
D000368:Aged; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D055088:Early Detection of Cancer / Q000191:economics*; D005006:Ethnicity; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008175:Lung Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis*; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening; D008875:Middle Aged; D008913:Minority Groups; D018579:Patient Selection; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic / Q000191:economics*; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D014481:United States
Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:1-28
16533107
Clin Trials. 2009 Feb;6(1):52-9
19254935
Ann Epidemiol. 2003 Oct;13(9 Suppl):S18-77
14575939
Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ). 2005 Jun;(122):1-11
15989377
J Clin Oncol. 2006 May 10;24(14):2209-15
16682741
Cancer. 2008 Jan 15;112(2):228-42
18008363
Clin Trials. 2005;2(5):436-42
16315648
JAMA. 2004 Jun 9;291(22):2720-6
15187053
Contemp Clin Trials. 2008 Nov;29(6):847-61
18721901