Research Completed

Published Studies

Year Publication Categories
2016
Achieving Synergy: Linking an Internet-Based Inflammatory Bowel Disease Cohort to a Community-Based Inception Cohort and Multicentered Cohort in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Summary

Cohort studies follow groups of people to understand disease. They are difficult to organize and often do not focus on patient-reported outcomes. Internet-based cohort studies provide new opportunities to study patient-reported outcomes; they are also efficient and can easily include large numbers of people. Linking an Internet-based cohort study, like CCFA-Partners, to a traditional cohort study can be beneficial to both studies and add a tremendous amount of information about a disease. Therefore, we aimed to link CCFA-Partners with the Ocean State Crohn's and Colitis Area Registry (OSCCAR) and The Sinai-Helmsley Alliance for Research Excellence (SHARE), both of which are traditional cohort studies. OSCCAR is a cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) in Rhode Island. SHARE is a cohort across 7 academic medical centers around the United States. Both cohorts collect specimens, like blood and stool, from participants. OSCCAR enrolled people with IBD from 2008 to 2013. SHARE started enrolling people with IBD in July 2012 and enrollment is continuing. People in the cohorts who had access to the Internet were told about CCFA-Partners by the study coordinators and encouraged to enroll.

In the OSCCAR cohort, 243 of the 320 participants consented to join the CCFA-Partners cohort. However, only 44 participants completed enrollment in CCFA-Partners. OSCCAR participants who completed enrollment were better educated than those who did not complete enrollment. In the SHARE cohort, 436 participants completed enrolment in CCFA-Partners. SHARE participants who completed enrollment were more often women and white. If they had Crohn's disease, those who completed enrollment had fewer disease symptoms and if they had ulcerative colitis, those who completed enrollment had less extensive disease. Linkage of CCFA Partners with cohorts such as OSCCAR and SHARE may be a cost-effective way to expand opportunities for research. Although linkage is possible, participant's willingness to complete the linkage is the limiting factor. Asking participants in a traditional cohort at the time of enrollment may be a way of maximizing linkage to CCFA-Partners.


Full Published Manuscript

Keywords
cohort; Crohn's Disease; Crohn's; CD; population; patient-reported outcomes; symptoms; physical health; social health; psychosocial health;

Research Methods,
Study Updates,
Health Maintenance
2014
Perceptions of Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases on Biobanking

Summary

A biobank is a collection of samples from patients (including spit, stool or blood). Biobanks are very important for understanding risk factors for developing disease or for severity of disease. We wanted to understand more about why patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) would or would not participate in a biobank. We first did a series of interviews over the phone with patients who were participating in the CCFA Partners study. This helped us to understand the important concerns about biobanks and develop a survey for use in CCFA Partners. We then sent a survey to over 800 people with IBD in CCFA Partners. We did a total of 26 phone interviews. Patients doing the interviews told us that they had concerns about how samples would be collected/stored; who would be allowed access; whether these samples would be used for other things (not only research); and whether this would affect whether they could get life insurance. Most people were not that worried about using the blood for genetic studies. People thought that that biobanks were important for research, that they might lead to a cure; that by donating they would be helping others or family members with IBD; and hoped that they might personally benefit, although most understood that they likely would not. These themes aided in the development of a survey instrument to assess perceptions of biobanking. A total of 476 people initially finished the survey. Almost 40% said that they would 'definitely yes' donate samples, 56.0% would 'probably yes' donate, 5.1% 'probably no' and 0.7% 'definitely no'. There were no factors that made someone more likely to donate (reported donation rates were not different for Crohn's disease (CD) versus ulcerative colitis (UC), remission versus active disease, or education level. People were most willing to donate spit, followed by blood and lastly stool. Knowing these important thoughts on sample donation/biobanks will help researchers to develop consents for IBD biobanks and design educational materials on biobanks for IBD A biobank is a collection of biological samples, such as saliva, blood, and stool, from individuals with a common condition such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Biobanks are important for understanding risk factors for developing disease or for severity of disease. We wanted to learn more about IBD patients' understanding of and willingness to participate in a biobank. We first did 26 phone interviews with patient volunteers participating in the CCFA Partners study. Those interviews helped us better understand concerns related to biobanks. Patients doing the interviews told us that they had concerns about how samples would be collected/stored, who would be allowed access, whether these samples would be used for anything other than research, and whether participation in a biobank would affect life insurance eligibility. Most patients were not that worried about using blood for genetic studies. Participants thought biobanks were important for research, that they might lead to a cure, that by donating they would be helping others or family members with IBD, and hoped that they might personally benefit. These results from the phone interviews were used to develop an online survey instrument to assess perceptions of biobanking. In a larger sample, a total of 1,007 people with IBD completed the online survey. Almost 40% said they would 'definitely' donate samples, 56.4% would ‘probably’ donate, 3.6% ‘probably not’, and 0.6% 'definitely not'. There were no differences in willingness to donate specimens based on disease type (Crohn's vs. ulcerative colitis) or on disease activity (in remission vs. currently active disease). People were most willing to donate saliva specimens, followed by blood and lastly stool samples. Knowing these important attitudes and beliefs about sample donations and biobanks will help researchers develop consents and educational materials related to biobanks that will encourage wider involvement.


Full Published Manuscript

Keywords
biobanking; sample collection; sample storage, confidentiality; HIPAA; community; population;

Research Methods,
Study Updates