Cargando…

“And then I found $5”: Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials

INTRODUCTION: As clinical trials adopt remote methodologies, there is need to optimize efficiency of remote enrollment. Within a remote clinical trial, we aim to (1) assess if sociodemographic factors differ among those consenting via mail vs. technology-based procedures (e-consent), (2) determine i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fahey, Margaret C., Dahne, Jennifer, Chen, Brian K., Smith, Tracy T., Wahlquist, Amy E., Carpenter, Mathew J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10225265/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37250999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.533
_version_ 1785050363734261760
author Fahey, Margaret C.
Dahne, Jennifer
Chen, Brian K.
Smith, Tracy T.
Wahlquist, Amy E.
Carpenter, Mathew J.
author_facet Fahey, Margaret C.
Dahne, Jennifer
Chen, Brian K.
Smith, Tracy T.
Wahlquist, Amy E.
Carpenter, Mathew J.
author_sort Fahey, Margaret C.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: As clinical trials adopt remote methodologies, there is need to optimize efficiency of remote enrollment. Within a remote clinical trial, we aim to (1) assess if sociodemographic factors differ among those consenting via mail vs. technology-based procedures (e-consent), (2) determine if, among those consenting via mail, a small unconditional monetary reward ($5) increases likelihood of subsequent enrollment, (3) economically evaluate additional cost per additional participant enrolled with $5 reward. METHODS: In the parent nationwide randomized clinical trial of adult smokers (N = 638), participants could enroll via mail or e-consent. Logistic regression models assessed relationships between sociodemographics and enrollment via mail (vs e-consent). Mailed consent packets were randomized (1:4) to include $5 unconditional reward or not, and logistic regression modeling examined impact of reward on subsequent enrollment, allowing for a randomized study within a study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis estimated additional cost per additional participant enrolled with $5 incentive. RESULTS: Older age, less education, lower income, and female sex predicted enrolling via mail vs e-consent (p < .05’s). In adjusted model, older age (AOR = 1.02, p = .016) and less education (AOR = 2.23, p < .001) remained predictive of mail enrollment. The $5 incentive (vs none) increased enrollment rate by 9% (AOR = 1.64, p = .007), with estimated cost of additional $59 per additional participant enrolled. CONCLUSIONS: As e-consent methods become more common, they have potential to reach many individuals but with perhaps diminished inclusion across all sociodemographic groups. Provision of an unconditional monetary incentive is possibly a cost-effective mechanism to increase recruitment efficiency for studies employing mail-based consenting procedures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10225265
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102252652023-05-29 “And then I found $5”: Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials Fahey, Margaret C. Dahne, Jennifer Chen, Brian K. Smith, Tracy T. Wahlquist, Amy E. Carpenter, Mathew J. J Clin Transl Sci Research Article INTRODUCTION: As clinical trials adopt remote methodologies, there is need to optimize efficiency of remote enrollment. Within a remote clinical trial, we aim to (1) assess if sociodemographic factors differ among those consenting via mail vs. technology-based procedures (e-consent), (2) determine if, among those consenting via mail, a small unconditional monetary reward ($5) increases likelihood of subsequent enrollment, (3) economically evaluate additional cost per additional participant enrolled with $5 reward. METHODS: In the parent nationwide randomized clinical trial of adult smokers (N = 638), participants could enroll via mail or e-consent. Logistic regression models assessed relationships between sociodemographics and enrollment via mail (vs e-consent). Mailed consent packets were randomized (1:4) to include $5 unconditional reward or not, and logistic regression modeling examined impact of reward on subsequent enrollment, allowing for a randomized study within a study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis estimated additional cost per additional participant enrolled with $5 incentive. RESULTS: Older age, less education, lower income, and female sex predicted enrolling via mail vs e-consent (p < .05’s). In adjusted model, older age (AOR = 1.02, p = .016) and less education (AOR = 2.23, p < .001) remained predictive of mail enrollment. The $5 incentive (vs none) increased enrollment rate by 9% (AOR = 1.64, p = .007), with estimated cost of additional $59 per additional participant enrolled. CONCLUSIONS: As e-consent methods become more common, they have potential to reach many individuals but with perhaps diminished inclusion across all sociodemographic groups. Provision of an unconditional monetary incentive is possibly a cost-effective mechanism to increase recruitment efficiency for studies employing mail-based consenting procedures. Cambridge University Press 2023-04-20 /pmc/articles/PMC10225265/ /pubmed/37250999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.533 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Fahey, Margaret C.
Dahne, Jennifer
Chen, Brian K.
Smith, Tracy T.
Wahlquist, Amy E.
Carpenter, Mathew J.
“And then I found $5”: Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials
title “And then I found $5”: Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials
title_full “And then I found $5”: Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials
title_fullStr “And then I found $5”: Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials
title_full_unstemmed “And then I found $5”: Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials
title_short “And then I found $5”: Optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials
title_sort “and then i found $5”: optimizing recruitment efficiency in remote clinical trials
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10225265/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37250999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.533
work_keys_str_mv AT faheymargaretc andthenifound5optimizingrecruitmentefficiencyinremoteclinicaltrials
AT dahnejennifer andthenifound5optimizingrecruitmentefficiencyinremoteclinicaltrials
AT chenbriank andthenifound5optimizingrecruitmentefficiencyinremoteclinicaltrials
AT smithtracyt andthenifound5optimizingrecruitmentefficiencyinremoteclinicaltrials
AT wahlquistamye andthenifound5optimizingrecruitmentefficiencyinremoteclinicaltrials
AT carpentermathewj andthenifound5optimizingrecruitmentefficiencyinremoteclinicaltrials