Volunteer Participation in the Health eHeart Study: A Comparison with the US Population

Abstract Direct volunteer “eCohort” recruitment can be an efficient way of recruiting large numbers of participants, but there is potential for volunteer bias. We compared self-selected participants in the Health eHeart Study to participants in the National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey (N...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xiaofan Guo, Eric Vittinghoff, Jeffrey E. Olgin, Gregory M. Marcus, Mark J. Pletcher
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Nature Portfolio 2017
Materias:
R
Q
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/2a082f737ed54dbb8fdd84de3f55a131
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:2a082f737ed54dbb8fdd84de3f55a131
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:2a082f737ed54dbb8fdd84de3f55a1312021-12-02T12:30:42ZVolunteer Participation in the Health eHeart Study: A Comparison with the US Population10.1038/s41598-017-02232-y2045-2322https://doaj.org/article/2a082f737ed54dbb8fdd84de3f55a1312017-05-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-02232-yhttps://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Direct volunteer “eCohort” recruitment can be an efficient way of recruiting large numbers of participants, but there is potential for volunteer bias. We compared self-selected participants in the Health eHeart Study to participants in the National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013–14, a cross-sectional survey of the US population. Compared with the US population (represented by 5,769 NHANES participants), the 12,280 Health eHeart participants with complete survey data were more likely to be female (adjusted odds ratio (ORadj) = 3.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9–3.5); less likely to be Black, Hispanic, or Asian versus White/non-Hispanic (ORadj’s = 0.4–0.6, p < 0.01); more likely to be college-educated (ORadj = 15.8 (13–19) versus ≤high school); more likely to have cardiovascular diseases and risk factors (ORadj’s = 1.1–2.8, p < 0.05) except diabetes (ORadj = 0.8 (0.7–0.9); more likely to be in excellent general health (ORadj = 0.6 (0.5–0.8) for “Good” versus “Excellent”); and less likely to be current smokers (ORadj = 0.3 (0.3–0.4)). While most self-selection patterns held for Health eHeart users of Bluetooth blood pressure cuff technology, there were some striking differences; for example, the gender ratio was reversed (ORadj = 0.6 (0.4–0.7) for female gender). Volunteer participation in this cardiovascular health-focused eCohort was not uniform among US adults nor for different components of the study.Xiaofan GuoEric VittinghoffJeffrey E. OlginGregory M. MarcusMark J. PletcherNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 7, Iss 1, Pp 1-9 (2017)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Medicine
R
Science
Q
spellingShingle Medicine
R
Science
Q
Xiaofan Guo
Eric Vittinghoff
Jeffrey E. Olgin
Gregory M. Marcus
Mark J. Pletcher
Volunteer Participation in the Health eHeart Study: A Comparison with the US Population
description Abstract Direct volunteer “eCohort” recruitment can be an efficient way of recruiting large numbers of participants, but there is potential for volunteer bias. We compared self-selected participants in the Health eHeart Study to participants in the National Health And Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2013–14, a cross-sectional survey of the US population. Compared with the US population (represented by 5,769 NHANES participants), the 12,280 Health eHeart participants with complete survey data were more likely to be female (adjusted odds ratio (ORadj) = 3.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9–3.5); less likely to be Black, Hispanic, or Asian versus White/non-Hispanic (ORadj’s = 0.4–0.6, p < 0.01); more likely to be college-educated (ORadj = 15.8 (13–19) versus ≤high school); more likely to have cardiovascular diseases and risk factors (ORadj’s = 1.1–2.8, p < 0.05) except diabetes (ORadj = 0.8 (0.7–0.9); more likely to be in excellent general health (ORadj = 0.6 (0.5–0.8) for “Good” versus “Excellent”); and less likely to be current smokers (ORadj = 0.3 (0.3–0.4)). While most self-selection patterns held for Health eHeart users of Bluetooth blood pressure cuff technology, there were some striking differences; for example, the gender ratio was reversed (ORadj = 0.6 (0.4–0.7) for female gender). Volunteer participation in this cardiovascular health-focused eCohort was not uniform among US adults nor for different components of the study.
format article
author Xiaofan Guo
Eric Vittinghoff
Jeffrey E. Olgin
Gregory M. Marcus
Mark J. Pletcher
author_facet Xiaofan Guo
Eric Vittinghoff
Jeffrey E. Olgin
Gregory M. Marcus
Mark J. Pletcher
author_sort Xiaofan Guo
title Volunteer Participation in the Health eHeart Study: A Comparison with the US Population
title_short Volunteer Participation in the Health eHeart Study: A Comparison with the US Population
title_full Volunteer Participation in the Health eHeart Study: A Comparison with the US Population
title_fullStr Volunteer Participation in the Health eHeart Study: A Comparison with the US Population
title_full_unstemmed Volunteer Participation in the Health eHeart Study: A Comparison with the US Population
title_sort volunteer participation in the health eheart study: a comparison with the us population
publisher Nature Portfolio
publishDate 2017
url https://doaj.org/article/2a082f737ed54dbb8fdd84de3f55a131
work_keys_str_mv AT xiaofanguo volunteerparticipationinthehealtheheartstudyacomparisonwiththeuspopulation
AT ericvittinghoff volunteerparticipationinthehealtheheartstudyacomparisonwiththeuspopulation
AT jeffreyeolgin volunteerparticipationinthehealtheheartstudyacomparisonwiththeuspopulation
AT gregorymmarcus volunteerparticipationinthehealtheheartstudyacomparisonwiththeuspopulation
AT markjpletcher volunteerparticipationinthehealtheheartstudyacomparisonwiththeuspopulation
_version_ 1718394324082753536