Cargando…
Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review
BACKGROUND: Recruitment and retention challenges are very common in mental health randomised trials. Investigators utilise different methods to improve recruitment or retention. However, evidence of the effectiveness and efficiency of these strategies in mental health has not been synthesised. This...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6114918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30157250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203127 |
_version_ | 1783351287304159232 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Yifeng Pencheon, Emma Hunter, Rachael Maree Moncrieff, Joanna Freemantle, Nick |
author_facet | Liu, Yifeng Pencheon, Emma Hunter, Rachael Maree Moncrieff, Joanna Freemantle, Nick |
author_sort | Liu, Yifeng |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Recruitment and retention challenges are very common in mental health randomised trials. Investigators utilise different methods to improve recruitment or retention. However, evidence of the effectiveness and efficiency of these strategies in mental health has not been synthesised. This systematic review is to investigate and assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different strategies to improve recruitment and retention in mental health randomised trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Methodology Register and PsycINFO were searched from beginning of record up to July 2016. Randomised trials involving participants with mental health problems which compared different strategies for recruitment or retention were selected. Two authors independently screened identified studies for eligibility. RESULTS: A total of 5,157 citations were identified. Thirteen articles were included, 11 on recruitment and 2 on retention. Three randomised controlled trials compared different recruitment strategies, none of which found statistically significant differences between the interventional recruitment strategies and the routine recruitment methods. Retrospective comparisons of recruitment methods showed that non-web-based advertisement and recruitment by clinical research staff each have advantages in efficiency. Web-based adverts had the lowest cost per person recruited (£13.41 per person recruited). Specialised care referral cost £183.24 per person, non-web-based adverts cost £372.03 per patient and recruitment via primary care cost £407.65 for each patient. Financial incentives, abridged questionnaires and pre-notification had a positive effect on retention rates. CONCLUSION: The recruitment studies included showed differences in strategies, clinical settings, mental health conditions and study design. It is difficult to assess the overall effectiveness of any particular recruitment strategy as some strategies that worked well for a particular population may not work as well for others. Paying attention to the accessibility of information and consent materials may help improve recruitment. More research in this area is needed given its important implications. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6114918 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61149182018-09-17 Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review Liu, Yifeng Pencheon, Emma Hunter, Rachael Maree Moncrieff, Joanna Freemantle, Nick PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Recruitment and retention challenges are very common in mental health randomised trials. Investigators utilise different methods to improve recruitment or retention. However, evidence of the effectiveness and efficiency of these strategies in mental health has not been synthesised. This systematic review is to investigate and assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different strategies to improve recruitment and retention in mental health randomised trials. METHODS AND MATERIALS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Methodology Register and PsycINFO were searched from beginning of record up to July 2016. Randomised trials involving participants with mental health problems which compared different strategies for recruitment or retention were selected. Two authors independently screened identified studies for eligibility. RESULTS: A total of 5,157 citations were identified. Thirteen articles were included, 11 on recruitment and 2 on retention. Three randomised controlled trials compared different recruitment strategies, none of which found statistically significant differences between the interventional recruitment strategies and the routine recruitment methods. Retrospective comparisons of recruitment methods showed that non-web-based advertisement and recruitment by clinical research staff each have advantages in efficiency. Web-based adverts had the lowest cost per person recruited (£13.41 per person recruited). Specialised care referral cost £183.24 per person, non-web-based adverts cost £372.03 per patient and recruitment via primary care cost £407.65 for each patient. Financial incentives, abridged questionnaires and pre-notification had a positive effect on retention rates. CONCLUSION: The recruitment studies included showed differences in strategies, clinical settings, mental health conditions and study design. It is difficult to assess the overall effectiveness of any particular recruitment strategy as some strategies that worked well for a particular population may not work as well for others. Paying attention to the accessibility of information and consent materials may help improve recruitment. More research in this area is needed given its important implications. Public Library of Science 2018-08-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6114918/ /pubmed/30157250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203127 Text en © 2018 Liu 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Liu, Yifeng Pencheon, Emma Hunter, Rachael Maree Moncrieff, Joanna Freemantle, Nick Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review |
title | Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review |
title_full | Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review |
title_fullStr | Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review |
title_short | Recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – A systematic review |
title_sort | recruitment and retention strategies in mental health trials – a systematic review |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6114918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30157250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203127 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liuyifeng recruitmentandretentionstrategiesinmentalhealthtrialsasystematicreview AT pencheonemma recruitmentandretentionstrategiesinmentalhealthtrialsasystematicreview AT hunterrachaelmaree recruitmentandretentionstrategiesinmentalhealthtrialsasystematicreview AT moncrieffjoanna recruitmentandretentionstrategiesinmentalhealthtrialsasystematicreview AT freemantlenick recruitmentandretentionstrategiesinmentalhealthtrialsasystematicreview |