Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22273586›Full record

ArticleClinical trials (London, England)2012

A model for the design and implementation of a participant recruitment registry for clinical studies of older adults.

N Maritza Dowling, Nevin Olson, Thomas Mish, Preethy Kaprakattu, Carey Gleason

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical trials (London, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Contemporary use of real-world data for clinical trial conduct in the United States: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Recruiting Community-Based Dementia Patients and Caregivers in a Nonpharmacologic Randomized Trial: What Works and How Much Does It Cost?Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2016
    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

5 authors.

N Maritza DowlingDepartment of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53792-4675, USA. nmdowlin@biostat.wisc.edu
Nevin Olson
Thomas Mish
Preethy Kaprakattu
Carey Gleason

Funding

Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP50AG033514 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI CHAPPELL, RICHARD J · 2009 to 2018
$16.2M
NIA NIH HHS P50 AG033514
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe identification and enlistment of suitable participants into clinical studies is often challenging, requiring a large commitment of time and staff resources. The recruitment and retention of populations typically underrepresented in research present additional challenges to enrollment of sufficient numbers of participants in clinical studies. Inadequate participation may undermine the pace and direction of new treatment discoveries. PURPOSE: Registries of potential research participants are powerful tools to support research by providing a framework to streamline screening and recruitment and to maintain a communication history with potential research participants. The authors present a model for the development and implementation of a web-based database system to support recruitment, enrollment, and retention of potential study participants in close alignment with the goals of the Wisconsin Alzheimer's Disease Research Center (ADRC).

methodsThe required data elements and major information domains for the registry were identified using a structured problem-solving and system design approach and the collaboration of a multidisciplinary team of stakeholders. The system performance, utility, and usability were assessed through multiple iterations with the users.

resultsThe process-oriented approach culminated in a multifaceted tool that combined contact management and potential research participant registration to assist with the challenges of recruitment and retention in clinical research. A unique feature of the registry design model was its contact management capabilities for efficient tracking of all contacts with registrants. LIMITATIONS: We have focused on the development and implementation of a system for the recruitment of older adults with specific cognitive and medical characteristics. However, our procedures for identifying data needs and database system utility and functionality can be transferred easily to other populations and settings. As with any multipurpose registry database system, careful management and training are essential to optimize efficiency.

conclusionAdding a contact management element to the registry design significantly improved the efficiency of communication between clinical study coordinators and potential research participants, as well as the communication among coordinators.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicModels, OrganizationalPatient SelectionRegistriesAgedCognition DisordersHumansWisconsin

Identifiers

PMID22273586
PMCPMC3325341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.