Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25887970›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2015

Barriers and facilitators to patient recruitment to a cluster randomized controlled trial in primary care: lessons for future trials.

Juliet M Foster, Susan M Sawyer, Lorraine Smith, Helen K Reddel, Tim Usherwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  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.

Juliet M FosterClinical Management Group, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. j.m.foster@woolcock.org.au.
Susan M SawyerCentre for Adolescent Health, Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. susan.sawyer@rch.org.au.
Lorraine SmithFaculty of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. lorraine.smith@sydney.edu.au.
Helen K ReddelClinical Management Group, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. helen.reddel@sydney.edu.au.
Tim UsherwoodDepartment of General Practice Sydney Medical School Westmead, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. tim.usherwood@sydney.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary-care based randomized controlled trials (RCTs) build an important evidence base for general practice but little evidence exists about barriers to recruitment which often hamper such trials. We investigated the issues that impeded and facilitated recruitment to a clinical trial in general practice.

methodsGPs participating in a cluster RCT that tested interventions for improving medication adherence and asthma control completed a survey comprising quantitative and free text questions about their recruitment experiences. We used backward regression to analyze quantitative data and coded free text responses into themes.

results40/55 of enrolled GPs recruited patients, but only one-third reached the planned recruitment target (5 patients/GP). In univariate analyses, poor patient recruitment by GPs was significantly associated with longer time to first patient enrolment, GP-perceived poor access to eligible patients and GP working in a practice training medical students. In regression analysis, only the first was significant (p = 0.001); the explained variance of the model was 48%. Themes from free text responses described recruitment barriers at the level of GP (e.g. GPs excluding patients for whom research appeared too challenging), practice (e.g. practice cultures disempowered GPs), patient (e.g. reluctance to change treatment for research) and study (e.g. protocol requirements complicating recruitment). Facilitators included GPs perceiving good support from the research team.

conclusionTargeted recruitment support early in the recruitment phase may enhance recruitment rates. Over time, interventions to enhance a general practice research culture are also likely to enhance skills to recruit patients, even for complex interventions. We recommend systematic evaluation of recruitment approaches and outcomes in future RCTs to optimize feasibility and success of these important trials.

trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000854033 (date registered 14/10/2010).

Indexed as

General PractitionersPatient SelectionAdultAnalysis of VarianceAsthmaAustraliaDrug MonitoringFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew ZealandPrimary Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRegression Analysis

Identifiers

PMID25887970
PMCPMC4369080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.