↓ Skip to main content

Learning from older peoples’ reasons for participating in demanding, intensive epidemiological studies: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Learning from older peoples’ reasons for participating in demanding, intensive epidemiological studies: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12874-017-0439-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alicja M. Baczynska, Sarah C. Shaw, Harnish P. Patel, Avan A. Sayer, Helen C. Roberts

Abstract

Recruitment rates of older people in epidemiological studies, although relatively higher than in clinical trials, have declined in recent years. This study aimed to explore motivating factors and concerns among older participants in an intensive epidemiological study (Hertfordshire Sarcopenia Study - HSS) and identify those that could aid future recruitment to epidemiological studies and clinical trials. Participants of the HSS fasted overnight and travelled several hours each way to the research facility at an English hospital for extensive diet/lifestyle questionnaires and investigations to assess muscle including blood tests and a muscle biopsy. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 participants (ten women) at the research facility in May-October 2015. The interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed thematically by three researchers. We identified personal motives for participation (potential health benefit for self and family; curiosity; comparing own fitness to others; socialising). Altruistic motives (benefit for other people; belief in importance of research) were also important. Participants voiced a number of external motives related to the study uniqueness, organisation and safety record; family support; and just 'being asked'. Anxiety about the biopsy and travel distance were the only concerns and were alleviated by smooth and efficient running of the study. Personal and altruistic reasons were important motivators for these older people to participate in demanding, intensive research. They valued belonging to a birth cohort with previous research experience, but personal contact with the research team before and after consent provided reassurance, aided recruitment to HSS and could be readily replicated by other researchers. Any fears or concerns related to certain aspects of a demanding, intensive study should ideally be explored at an early visit to establish a good relationship with the research team.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 21%
Student > Master 13 19%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 15 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 10 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Psychology 9 13%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 16 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,960,787
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,456
of 2,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,589
of 439,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#31
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,029 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,142 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.