Cargando…
Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis
INTRODUCTION: Research on research is key to enhancing efficacy in trial methodology. Clinical trials involving women during pregnancy and childbirth are limited, with a paucity of data guiding evidence-based practice. Following a prioritisation exercise that highlighted the top-ten unanswered recru...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7304625/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32559236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234783 |
_version_ | 1783548293224071168 |
---|---|
author | Hanrahan, Vivienne Gillies, Katie Biesty, Linda |
author_facet | Hanrahan, Vivienne Gillies, Katie Biesty, Linda |
author_sort | Hanrahan, Vivienne |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Research on research is key to enhancing efficacy in trial methodology. Clinical trials involving women during pregnancy and childbirth are limited, with a paucity of data guiding evidence-based practice. Following a prioritisation exercise that highlighted the top-ten unanswered recruitment questions, this qualitative evidence synthesis was designed specifically to focus on the barriers and enablers for clinicians/healthcare professionals in helping conduct randomised trials within the context of recruitment during pregnancy and childbirth. METHODS: The synthesis was undertaken using Thomas and Harden’s three stage thematic synthesis method and reported following the ENTREQ guidelines. Using a pre-determined SPIDER strategy, we conducted a comprehensive search of databases; Pubmed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and grey searches for records until January 2019. We included all reports of qualitative data on recruiter’s experiences, perceptions, views of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials. Altogether 13,401 records were screened, resulting in 31 full-text reviews, of which five were eligible for inclusion. Quality was appraised using CASP. Data were extracted onto a specifically defined form. We used thematic synthesis to identify descriptive and analytical themes, and to interpret and generate theory. Confidence was assessed using GRADE-CERQual. The review protocol is publicly available (OSF https://osf.io/g4dt9/). RESULTS: Five papers (representing four individual studies) from two different countries were included. All studies focused on the experiences of trial recruiters in the maternity setting. We identified four analytical themes; Recruitment through a clinician’s lens, Recruiters judgement on acceptability, From protocol to recruiters lived experience, Framing recruitment in context. These were linked by an overarching theme combining beliefs and power. CONCLUSION: The overarching theme combining beliefs and power links the experiences and perceptions of recruiters. This synthesis shows a gap between the trial design study protocol and the recruiter’s lived experience. Strategies such as collaborative trial design, mitigating gatekeeping behaviours, and training may support recruiters in their endeavour. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7304625 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73046252020-06-22 Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis Hanrahan, Vivienne Gillies, Katie Biesty, Linda PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Research on research is key to enhancing efficacy in trial methodology. Clinical trials involving women during pregnancy and childbirth are limited, with a paucity of data guiding evidence-based practice. Following a prioritisation exercise that highlighted the top-ten unanswered recruitment questions, this qualitative evidence synthesis was designed specifically to focus on the barriers and enablers for clinicians/healthcare professionals in helping conduct randomised trials within the context of recruitment during pregnancy and childbirth. METHODS: The synthesis was undertaken using Thomas and Harden’s three stage thematic synthesis method and reported following the ENTREQ guidelines. Using a pre-determined SPIDER strategy, we conducted a comprehensive search of databases; Pubmed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and grey searches for records until January 2019. We included all reports of qualitative data on recruiter’s experiences, perceptions, views of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials. Altogether 13,401 records were screened, resulting in 31 full-text reviews, of which five were eligible for inclusion. Quality was appraised using CASP. Data were extracted onto a specifically defined form. We used thematic synthesis to identify descriptive and analytical themes, and to interpret and generate theory. Confidence was assessed using GRADE-CERQual. The review protocol is publicly available (OSF https://osf.io/g4dt9/). RESULTS: Five papers (representing four individual studies) from two different countries were included. All studies focused on the experiences of trial recruiters in the maternity setting. We identified four analytical themes; Recruitment through a clinician’s lens, Recruiters judgement on acceptability, From protocol to recruiters lived experience, Framing recruitment in context. These were linked by an overarching theme combining beliefs and power. CONCLUSION: The overarching theme combining beliefs and power links the experiences and perceptions of recruiters. This synthesis shows a gap between the trial design study protocol and the recruiter’s lived experience. Strategies such as collaborative trial design, mitigating gatekeeping behaviours, and training may support recruiters in their endeavour. Public Library of Science 2020-06-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7304625/ /pubmed/32559236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234783 Text en © 2020 Hanrahan 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 Hanrahan, Vivienne Gillies, Katie Biesty, Linda Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis |
title | Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis |
title_full | Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis |
title_fullStr | Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis |
title_full_unstemmed | Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis |
title_short | Recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: A qualitative evidence synthesis |
title_sort | recruiters' perspectives of recruiting women during pregnancy and childbirth to clinical trials: a qualitative evidence synthesis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7304625/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32559236 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234783 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hanrahanvivienne recruitersperspectivesofrecruitingwomenduringpregnancyandchildbirthtoclinicaltrialsaqualitativeevidencesynthesis AT gillieskatie recruitersperspectivesofrecruitingwomenduringpregnancyandchildbirthtoclinicaltrialsaqualitativeevidencesynthesis AT biestylinda recruitersperspectivesofrecruitingwomenduringpregnancyandchildbirthtoclinicaltrialsaqualitativeevidencesynthesis |