Present:

1. Coday (U. of Tennessee): enrolled 62 participants; not screening at required rate currently but held up by building of data base; now at full staff; randomizing 4-6 per week.
    
2. Strycker (ORI): 35-40 enrolled; want 250; on target currently; will begin assessment process on 6/5; first retreat scheduled for July 21.
   
3. Toledo (Stanford): want 225; enrolled 30 to date; assessment process begins 6/5; on target.
   
4. Johnston (Kansas): recruiting at level of middle schools; 16 schools enrolled; all baseline measures collected; currently installing card readers at schools and training staff. On target.
   
5. McQuaid (Brown): partnering with managed care; beginning recruitment now; 3 baseline interviews completed; recruitment efforts dependent upon managed care staff; process working well currently.
   
6. Sher (IIT): need to review eligibility requirements; appear too stringent as too many files are being reviewed for too few eligible patients; efforts aimed so far at educating staff and M.D.’s about project; 6 possible people approached and ready to complete consent forms. Plan to approach managed care groups as well as physicians.
   
7. Saunders (URI): community-based project; need 1,300 participants; starting intervention in June; rolling recruitment; multiple recruiting strategies dependent upon volunteers as participants; no participants to date but list of potential participants generated.

Coday added some categories to the table in order to keep the table consistent with required NIH information such as additional race and ineligibility categories.

Questions were asked regarding how to personalize table to site and population.

1. For example, some sites need separate screening id. #’s; some sites omit "contact attempted column" secondary to participants calling in themselves; and other sites added contact type (e.g. phone, walk-in) and contact response; finally some sites will add a column for ‘screening completed.’
2. Decided that all columns will not work for all sites and that sites will need to adapt table to fit their needs but that the information on the table currently will be available from all sites.

Article covers 3 areas of recruitment:

• Dissemination: how are people finding out about project;
• Representation: how difficult is it to recruit a representative sample; gold standard is 60% minority inclusion;
• Randomization: explaining randomization to participants so as to decrease disappointment if not selected for experimental group.

This was an issue for a number of sites. Site were explaining to participants that every intervention had been shown to be efficacious in previous studies (standard care versus something additional) and the process of randomization.

• Coday will mail Women’s Health Initiative article to Sher.
• Coday will revise table in keeping with this discussion and disseminate to BCC at large via email and to R&R committee.
• R& R working group will think about an article/paper to come from these discussions and talk about ideas at upcoming BCC meeting in Washington.
• Each site will bring examples of recruitment/retention items/novelties to BCC meeting.
• Coday will alert M. Ory as to how much time is needed at BCC meeting for R & R group to meet.