Trial reportTrials2013
Randomized controlled trial comparing telephone and mail follow-up for recruitment of participants into a clinical trial of colorectal cancer screening.
Trial report in Trials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00865527 (Randomized Comparison of Virtual Colonoscopy, Optical Colonoscopy, and Fecal Occult Blood Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Randomized Comparison of Virtual Colonoscopy, Optical Colonoscopy, and Fecal Occult Blood Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening: a Pilot Study
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Effects of different invitation strategies on participation in a cohort study of Iranian public sector employees: a cluster randomized trial.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Internet-based, randomized, controlled trial of omega-3 fatty acids for hyperactivity in autism.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2014Trial
- Effective recruitment strategies and community-based participatory research: community networks program centers' recruitment in cancer prevention studies.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2014Trial
- Article
- Patient engagement and shared decision-making in trial recruitment intervention studies: a systematic review.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Feasibility and acceptability of patient- and clinician-level antithrombotic stewardship interventions to reduce gastrointestinal bleeding risk in patients using warfarin (Anticoagulation with Enhanced Gastrointestinal Safety): a factorial randomized controlled pilot trial.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2024Article
- Describing the content of trial recruitment interventions using the TIDieR reporting checklist: a systematic methodology review.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Telephone Outreach Enhances Recruitment of Underrepresented Seriously Ill Patients for an Advance Care Planning Pragmatic Trial.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Early experience with an opt-in research register - Scottish Health Research Register (SHARE): a multi-method evaluation of participant recruitment performance.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Article
- Trial Forge Guidance 2: how to decide if a further Study Within A Trial (SWAT) is needed.Trials · 2020Article
- Article
- Optimizing recruitment to a prostate cancer surveillance program among male BRCA1 mutation carriers: invitation by mail or by telephone.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2013Article
- Primary Caregiver Retention and Perceptions of Retention Strategies in a 36-Month Prospective Childhood Caries Study.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInvestigators often face challenges when recruiting participants into randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Some data suggest that telephone reminders may lead to greater participant enrollment.
methodsPatients aged 50 to 70 years from family practice rosters were initially mailed invitations to participate in an RCT of colorectal cancer screening. Patients who did not respond were randomly allocated to follow-up invitations by either telephone or mail four weeks after the initial invitation. The primary outcome was attendance for eligibility screening with the study nurse.
resultsAfter mailing invitations to 1,348 patients, 104 patients were initially enrolled in the RCT of colon cancer screening. Of 952 patients who did not respond to the initial mailed invitation, we randomly allocated 480 to follow-up invitation by telephone and 472 to follow-up invitation by mail. Attendance for eligibility screening with the study nurse was more frequent when non-responders were followed-up by telephone (84/480, 17.5%) than by mail (43/472, 9.1%) (relative risk (RR) 1.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.36 to 2.71, P < 0.001). Enrollment into the RCT was also greater among patients followed-up by telephone (59/480, 12.3%) compared to those followed-up by mail (35/472, 7.4%) (RR 1.66, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.47, P=0.01).
conclusionsTelephone-based follow-up results in greater enrollment compared to a mail-based method. Our findings should be of interest to investigators conducting RCTs, particularly trials of screening interventions involving asymptomatic participants for which volunteer participation may be challenging.
trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT00865527.
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.