Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Jul 6;10(7):e0131521.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131521. eCollection 2015.

How to Establish and Follow up a Large Prospective Cohort Study in the 21st Century--Lessons from UK COSMOS

Affiliations

How to Establish and Follow up a Large Prospective Cohort Study in the 21st Century--Lessons from UK COSMOS

Mireille B Toledano et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Large-scale prospective cohort studies are invaluable in epidemiology, but they are increasingly difficult and costly to establish and follow-up. More efficient methods for recruitment, data collection and follow-up are essential if such studies are to remain feasible with limited public and research funds. Here, we discuss how these challenges were addressed in the UK COSMOS cohort study where fixed budget and limited time frame necessitated new approaches to consent and recruitment between 2009-2012. Web-based e-consent and data collection should be considered in large scale observational studies, as they offer a streamlined experience which benefits both participants and researchers and save costs. Commercial providers of register and marketing data, smartphones, apps, email, social media, and the internet offer innovative possibilities for identifying, recruiting and following up cohorts. Using examples from UK COSMOS, this article sets out the dos and don'ts for today's cohort studies and provides a guide on how best to take advantage of new technologies and innovative methods to simplify logistics and minimise costs. Thus a more streamlined experience to the benefit of both research participants and researchers becomes achievable.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: Both MBT and PE receive research funding in support of research on mobile phones and health. PE is Principal Investigator and MBT co-Principal Investigator of the UK COSMOS study which is funded as described above. MBT is Principal Investigator and PE co-Investigator of the SCAMP study which is funded, via the independent Research Initiative on Health and Mobile Telecommunications (RIHMT), by the UK Health Departments, the Medical Research Council, the Health and Safety Executive, and industry funders [Vodafone, Arqiva, Carphone Warehouse, BT, 3UK, Everything Everywhere EE (Orange and T-Mobile), Telefonica Europe Plc (O2)]. The RIHMT is managed by the UK Department of Health Policy Research Programme. PE is a member of the MRC-PHE Joint Committee on Radiological and Toxicological Sciences. RBS, MD and JPB declare they have no competing interests. The authors confirm that the Competing Interests statement does not alter the authors' adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Cumulative response rates to UK COSMOS study invitations, by recruitment phase, 2009–2012.
Fig 1 Footnotes: Phase 1 used a mobile phone subscriber sampling frame, letter invitation, paper consent and registration, questionnaire via paper or web and no incentive. Phase 2 used a mobile phone subscriber sampling frame, letter invitation, web-based consent, registration, and questionnaire and a prize draw incentive. Phase 3 used a direct marketing list sampling frame, SMS invitation, web-based consent, registration, and questionnaire and no incentive. Phase 5 used an electoral register sampling frame, letter invitation, web-based consent, registration, and questionnaire and a prize draw incentive. Phase 6 used an electoral register sampling frame, letter invitation, web-based consent, registration, and questionnaire and a gift voucher incentive. Phase 7 used an electoral register sampling frame, letter invitation, web-based consent, registration, and questionnaire and a gift voucher incentive. ‘Invitation only’ represents recruitment of invitee named on letter, and ‘Spin-off recruitment’ represents recruitment of additional friends and family.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Characteristics of participants from two major recruitment campaigns to the UK COSMOS study (Phases 2 and 7).
Legend: Blue bars represent Phase 2, red bars represent Phase 7. Fig 2 Footnotes: Phase 2 used a mobile phone subscriber sampling frame, letter invitation, web-based consent, registration, and questionnaire and a prize draw incentive, and recruited N = 67,793. Phase 7 used an electoral register sampling frame, letter invitation, web-based consent, registration, and questionnaire and a gift voucher incentive, and recruited N = 36,316. Together Phases 2 and 7 recruited N = 104,109. The profile of participants presented here is based on N = 67627 from Phase 2 and N = 36218 from Phase 7, i.e. excluding 264 withdrawals. With the exception of socio-economic classification, the percentages calculated exclude Missing from the denominator. N for missing are as follows: Phase 2: Sex N = 290, Age group N = 306, Ethnicity N = 9205, Highest Educational Qualification N = 9124, Smoking N = 8404; Phase 7: Sex N = 2, Age group N = 9, Ethnicity N = 5135, Highest Educational Qualification N = 5083, Smoking N = 4760. For socio-economic classification Missing are included in the Not classified category, which also contains people who never worked or were long-term unemployed and therefore could not be assigned a classification based on occupation.

References

    1. Ward H, Toledano MB, Shaddick G, Davies B, Elliott P. Oxford Handbook of Epidemiology for Clinicians. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.
    1. Doll R, Hill AB. The mortality of doctors in relation to their smoking habits: a preliminary report. 1954. BMJ. 2004;328(7455):1529–33. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dawber TR, Kannel WB, Lyell LP. An approach to longitudinal studies in a community: the Framingham Study. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1963;107:539–56. - PubMed
    1. The Nurses' Health Study. History webpage. 2014. Available from: http://www.channing.harvard.edu/nhs/?page_id=70.
    1. Allen N, Sudlow C, Downey P, Peakman T, Danesh J, Elliott P, et al. UK Biobank: Current status and what it means for epidemiology. Health Policy and Technology. 2012;1(3):123–6.

Publication types