SynthesisBMJ open2014
Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 133 papers, 11 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
133 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Interventions on Smoking, Nutrition, Alcohol, Physical Activity and/or Obesity Risk Factors: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Retention in RCTs of physical rehabilitation for adults with frailty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Trials · 2022Pooled it
- The Challenges of Enrollment and Retention: A Systematic Review of Psychosocial Behavioral Interventions for Patients With Cancer and Their Family Caregivers.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Withdrawal reasons of randomized controlled trials on type 2 diabetes: a systematic review.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review of the efficiency of recruitment to stroke rehabilitation randomised controlled trials.Trials · 2020Pooled it
- Retention strategies in longitudinal cohort studies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Pooled it
- Post-trial follow-up methodology in large randomised controlled trials: a systematic review.Trials · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Do Natural Experiments of Changes in Neighborhood Built Environment Impact Physical Activity and Diet? A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Pooled it
- Updated systematic review identifies substantial number of retention strategies: using more strategies retains more study participants.Journal of clinical epidemiology · 2015Pooled it
- Trial
- Recruiting patients into a digital behavioural intervention in general practice: insights from the ENERGISED trial.BMC primary care · 2026Trial
- The influence of identity-oriented psychotrauma therapy on Hashimoto disease activity: a randomised controlled trial.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2025Trial
- Retention in theBMJ global health · 2025Trial
- Addressing Susceptibility to Non-Prescription Substances for Weight Loss Among Immigrant Hispanic College Students: A Pilot Study.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Feasibility Randomised Control Trial of OptiMal: A Self-Management Intervention for Cancer Survivors.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Trial
- African American Recruitment in Early Heart Failure Palliative Care Trials: Outcomes and Comparison With the ENABLE CHF-PC Randomized Trial.Journal of palliative care · 2023Trial
- Incentive delivery timing and follow-up survey completion in a prospective cohort study of injured children: a randomized experiment comparing prepaid and postpaid incentives.BMC medical research methodology · 2021Trial
73 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo quantify the effect of strategies to improve retention in randomised trials.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Sources searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, DARE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, C2-SPECTR, ERIC, PreMEDLINE, Cochrane Methodology Register, Current Controlled Trials metaRegister, WHO trials platform, Society for Clinical Trials (SCT) conference proceedings and a survey of all UK clinical trial research units. REVIEW
methodsIncluded trials were randomised evaluations of strategies to improve retention embedded within host randomised trials. The primary outcome was retention of trial participants. Data from trials were pooled using the fixed-effect model. Subgroup analyses were used to explore the heterogeneity and to determine whether there were any differences in effect by the type of strategy.
results38 retention trials were identified. Six broad types of strategies were evaluated. Strategies that increased postal questionnaire responses were: adding, that is, giving a monetary incentive (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.28) and higher valued incentives (RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.22). Offering a monetary incentive, that is, an incentive given on receipt of a completed questionnaire, also increased electronic questionnaire response (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.38). The evidence for shorter questionnaires (RR 1.04; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08) and questionnaires relevant to the disease/condition (RR 1.07; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.14) is less clear. On the basis of the results of single trials, the following strategies appeared effective at increasing questionnaire response: recorded delivery of questionnaires (RR 2.08; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.87); a 'package' of postal communication strategies (RR 1.43; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.67) and an open trial design (RR 1.37; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.63). There is no good evidence that the following strategies impact on trial response/retention: adding a non-monetary incentive (RR=1.00; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.02); offering a non-monetary incentive (RR=0.99; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03); 'enhanced' letters (RR=1.01; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.05); monetary incentives compared with offering prize draw entry (RR=1.04; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.19); priority postal delivery (RR=1.02; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.09); behavioural motivational strategies (RR=1.08; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.24); additional reminders to participants (RR=1.03; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.06) and questionnaire question order (RR=1.00, 0.97 to 1.02). Also based on single trials, these strategies do not appear effective: a telephone survey compared with a monetary incentive plus questionnaire (RR=1.08; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.24); offering a charity donation (RR=1.02, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.32); sending sites reminders (RR=0.96; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.11); sending questionnaires early (RR=1.10; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.26); longer and clearer questionnaires (RR=1.01, 0.95 to 1.07) and participant case management by trial assistants (RR=1.00; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04).
conclusionsMost of the trials evaluated questionnaire response rather than ways to improve participants return to site for follow-up. Monetary incentives and offers of monetary incentives increase postal and electronic questionnaire response. Some strategies need further evaluation. Application of these results would depend on trial context and follow-up procedures.
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.