Participation rates for organized colorectal cancer screening programmes: an international comparison.

OBJECTIVE: Participation, an indicator of screening programme acceptance and effectiveness, varies widely in clinical trials and population-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programmes. We aimed to assess whether CRC screening participation rates can be compared across organized guaiac fecal occult blood test (G-FOBT)/fecal immunochemical test (FIT)-based programmes, and what factors influence these rates. METHODS: Programme representatives from countries participating in the International Cancer Screening Network were surveyed to describe their G-FOBT/FIT-based CRC screening programmes, how screening participation is defined and measured, and to provide participation data for their most recent completed screening round. RESULTS: Information was obtained from 15 programmes in 12 countries. Programmes varied in size, reach, maturity, target age groups, exclusions, type of test kit, method of providing test kits and use, and frequency of reminders. Coverage by invitation ranged from 30-100%, coverage by the screening programme from 7-67.7%, overall uptake/participation rate from 7-67.7%, and first invitation participation from 7-64.3%. Participation rates generally increased with age and were higher among women than men and for subsequent compared with first invitation participation. CONCLUSION: Comparisons among CRC screening programmes should be made cautiously, given differences in organization, target populations, and interpretation of indicators. More meaningful comparisons are possible if rates are calculated across a uniform age range, by gender, and separately for people invited for the first time vs. previously.

Readiness to participate in psychiatric research.

BACKGROUND: The feasibility of clinical trials depends, among other factors, on the number of eligible patients, the recruitment process, and the readiness of patients to participate in research. Seeking patients' views about their experience in research projects may allow investigators to develop more effective recruitment and retention strategies. METHODS: A total of 100 patients consecutively admitted to a psychiatric university hospital were interviewed with respect to their willingness to participate in a study. For a different study scenario, patients were asked whether they would be ready to participate if such a study were organized in the service and to indicate their reasons for refusing or for participating. RESULTS: The general readiness to participate in a study ranged between 70% and 96%. The prospect of remuneration did not notably augment the potential consent rate. The most common and spontaneous motivation for agreeing to take part in a study was to help science progress and to allow future patients to benefit from improved diagnosis and treatment (87%). The presence or lack of a financial incentive was rarely chosen as an argument to agree (23%) or to refuse (7%) to participate. Patients relied mainly on their treating physicians when contemplating possible participation in a study (family physician [65%] and hospital physician [54%]). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and, in particular, treating doctors can play an important role in facilitating the recruitment process.