ArticleClinical therapeutics2011
Characteristics of successful recruitment in prospective pediatric pharmacogenetic studies.
Article in Clinical therapeutics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Translating Precision Health for Pediatrics: A Scoping Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Factors Associated with Clinical Research Recruitment in a Pediatric Academic Medical Center--A Web-Based Survey.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is a need to explore feasible means of accruing an appropriate study cohort to help fill the knowledge gap between pharmacogenetic contributions to drug response and clinical application in the pediatric population.
objectivesThe aim of this study was to identify factors affecting recruitment of eligible subjects in pharmacogenetic studies at a large Midwestern pediatric academic medical center. The objectives were to evaluate recruitment success of ongoing trials and ascertain contributors to differential recruitment rates. We hypothesized that studies with good recruitment of eligible subjects would share characteristics not present in studies with lower than anticipated recruitment. The goal was to better understand barriers to good recruitment in pharmacogenetic studies to help inform future trial and infrastructure design.
methodsInvestigators designed a survey with proposed elements of success, which was then completed by lead and/or site investigators of all pharmacogenetics studies at the institution. Results were evaluated using an investigator-developed likelihood of success scoring system.
resultsTwo studies recruited >95% of the approached eligible patients; 4 studies were consistent with investigator-anticipated recruitment (>50%), and 1 study did not meet expected recruitment. A study's total score on the investigator-devised scoring tool correlated well with the proportion of approached patients recruited (Pearson's correlation, r = 0.82; P < 0.001). Multiple factors impacted successful recruitment into these pharmacogenetic studies. Features of studies with successful recruitment included standardized clinical care, an ongoing team-patient relationship, severe and/or life-threatening outcome measures, study coordinator with experience in clinical research, a study medication with few or no alternative treatment options, and active involvement of the research team in clinical care.
conclusionsA scoring system for study characteristics may be useful to calculate the risk of failure for successful recruitment, allow discrimination among characteristics contributing to the risk, and permit study design alterations to improve likelihood of successful recruitment in pediatric pharmacogenetic studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.