Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19000399›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2008

Maximising recruitment and retention of general practices in clinical trials: a case study.

Elizabeth Dormandy, Fred Kavalier, Jane Logan, Hilary Harris, Nola Ishmael, Theresa M Marteau, SHIFT research team

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Offering antenatal sickle cell and thalassaemia screening to pregnant women in primary care: a qualitative study of GPs' experiences.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Elizabeth DormandyDepartment of Clinical Genetics, King's College London, London, UK.
Fred Kavalier
Jane Logan
Hilary Harris
Nola Ishmael
Theresa M Marteau
SHIFT research team

Funding

Department of Health 03/02/03Department of Health HTA/03/02/03Department of Health HTA_275
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited evidence regarding the factors that facilitate recruitment and retention of general practices in clinical trials. It is therefore pertinent to consider the factors that facilitate research in primary care.

aimTo formulate hypotheses about effective ways of recruiting and retaining practices to clinical trials, based on a case study. DESIGN OF STUDY: Case study of practice recruitment and retention to a trial of delivering antenatal sickle cell and thalassaemia screening.

settingTwo UK primary care trusts with 123 practices, with a high incidence of sickle cell and thalassaemia, and high levels of social deprivation.

methodPractices were invited to take part in the trial using a research information sheet for practices. Invitations were sent to all practice managers, GPs, practice nurses, and nurse practitioners. Expenses of approximately pound 3000 per practice were available. Practices and the research team signed research activity agreements, detailing a payment schedule based on deliverables. Semi-structured interviews were completed with 20 GPs who participated in the trial. Outcome measures were the number of practices recruited to, and completing, the trial.

resultsFour practices did not agree to randomisation and were excluded. Of 119 eligible practices, 29 expressed an interest in participation. Two practices withdrew from the trial and 27 participated (two hosted pilot studies and 25 completed the trial), giving a retention rate of 93% (27/29). The 27 participating practices did not differ from non-participating practices in list size, number of GPs, social deprivation, or minority ethnic group composition of the practice population.

conclusionThree factors appeared important in recruiting practices: research topic, invitation method, and interest in research. Three factors appeared important in retaining practices: good communication, easy data-collection methods, and payment upon meeting pre-agreed targets. The effectiveness of these factors at facilitating recruitment and retention requires assessment in experimental studies.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnemia, Sickle CellFamily PracticeFemaleHumansInterdisciplinary CommunicationPregnancyPregnancy Complications, HematologicSocioeconomic FactorsThalassemia

Identifiers

PMID19000399
PMCPMC2573972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.