Cargando…

Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: Recruitment of participants into randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is critical for successful trial conduct. Although there have been two previous systematic reviews on related topics, the results (which identified specific interventions) were inconclusive and not generalizable. The ai...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Caldwell, Patrina H. Y., Hamilton, Sana, Tan, Alvin, Craig, Jonathan C.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2976724/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21085696
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000368
_version_ 1782191002398752768
author Caldwell, Patrina H. Y.
Hamilton, Sana
Tan, Alvin
Craig, Jonathan C.
author_facet Caldwell, Patrina H. Y.
Hamilton, Sana
Tan, Alvin
Craig, Jonathan C.
author_sort Caldwell, Patrina H. Y.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recruitment of participants into randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is critical for successful trial conduct. Although there have been two previous systematic reviews on related topics, the results (which identified specific interventions) were inconclusive and not generalizable. The aim of our study was to evaluate the relative effectiveness of recruitment strategies for participation in RCTs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A systematic review, using the PRISMA guideline for reporting of systematic reviews, that compared methods of recruiting individual study participants into an actual or mock RCT were included. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and reference lists of relevant studies. From over 16,000 titles or abstracts reviewed, 396 papers were retrieved and 37 studies were included, in which 18,812 of at least 59,354 people approached agreed to participate in a clinical RCT. Recruitment strategies were broadly divided into four groups: novel trial designs (eight studies), recruiter differences (eight studies), incentives (two studies), and provision of trial information (19 studies). Strategies that increased people's awareness of the health problem being studied (e.g., an interactive computer program [relative risk (RR) 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00–2.18], attendance at an education session [RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.01–1.28], addition of a health questionnaire [RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.14–1.66]), or a video about the health condition (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.11–2.74), and also monetary incentives (RR1.39, 95% CI 1.13–1.64 to RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.28–1.84) improved recruitment. Increasing patients' understanding of the trial process, recruiter differences, and various methods of randomisation and consent design did not show a difference in recruitment. Consent rates were also higher for nonblinded trial design, but differential loss to follow up between groups may jeopardise the study findings. The study's main limitation was the necessity of modifying the search strategy with subsequent search updates because of changes in MEDLINE definitions. The abstracts of previous versions of this systematic review were published in 2002 and 2007. CONCLUSION: Recruitment strategies that focus on increasing potential participants' awareness of the health problem being studied, its potential impact on their health, and their engagement in the learning process appeared to increase recruitment to clinical studies. Further trials of recruitment strategies that target engaging participants to increase their awareness of the health problems being studied and the potential impact on their health may confirm this hypothesis. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
format Text
id pubmed-2976724
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29767242010-11-17 Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review Caldwell, Patrina H. Y. Hamilton, Sana Tan, Alvin Craig, Jonathan C. PLoS Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Recruitment of participants into randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is critical for successful trial conduct. Although there have been two previous systematic reviews on related topics, the results (which identified specific interventions) were inconclusive and not generalizable. The aim of our study was to evaluate the relative effectiveness of recruitment strategies for participation in RCTs. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A systematic review, using the PRISMA guideline for reporting of systematic reviews, that compared methods of recruiting individual study participants into an actual or mock RCT were included. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and reference lists of relevant studies. From over 16,000 titles or abstracts reviewed, 396 papers were retrieved and 37 studies were included, in which 18,812 of at least 59,354 people approached agreed to participate in a clinical RCT. Recruitment strategies were broadly divided into four groups: novel trial designs (eight studies), recruiter differences (eight studies), incentives (two studies), and provision of trial information (19 studies). Strategies that increased people's awareness of the health problem being studied (e.g., an interactive computer program [relative risk (RR) 1.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00–2.18], attendance at an education session [RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.01–1.28], addition of a health questionnaire [RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.14–1.66]), or a video about the health condition (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.11–2.74), and also monetary incentives (RR1.39, 95% CI 1.13–1.64 to RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.28–1.84) improved recruitment. Increasing patients' understanding of the trial process, recruiter differences, and various methods of randomisation and consent design did not show a difference in recruitment. Consent rates were also higher for nonblinded trial design, but differential loss to follow up between groups may jeopardise the study findings. The study's main limitation was the necessity of modifying the search strategy with subsequent search updates because of changes in MEDLINE definitions. The abstracts of previous versions of this systematic review were published in 2002 and 2007. CONCLUSION: Recruitment strategies that focus on increasing potential participants' awareness of the health problem being studied, its potential impact on their health, and their engagement in the learning process appeared to increase recruitment to clinical studies. Further trials of recruitment strategies that target engaging participants to increase their awareness of the health problems being studied and the potential impact on their health may confirm this hypothesis. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary Public Library of Science 2010-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC2976724/ /pubmed/21085696 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000368 Text en Caldwell et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Caldwell, Patrina H. Y.
Hamilton, Sana
Tan, Alvin
Craig, Jonathan C.
Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review
title Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review
title_full Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review
title_fullStr Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review
title_short Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review
title_sort strategies for increasing recruitment to randomised controlled trials: systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2976724/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21085696
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000368
work_keys_str_mv AT caldwellpatrinahy strategiesforincreasingrecruitmenttorandomisedcontrolledtrialssystematicreview
AT hamiltonsana strategiesforincreasingrecruitmenttorandomisedcontrolledtrialssystematicreview
AT tanalvin strategiesforincreasingrecruitmenttorandomisedcontrolledtrialssystematicreview
AT craigjonathanc strategiesforincreasingrecruitmenttorandomisedcontrolledtrialssystematicreview