Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25958221›Full record

Trial reportTrials2015

SWAT-1: The effectiveness of a 'site visit' intervention on recruitment rates in a multi-centre randomised trial.

Valerie Smith, Mike Clarke, Cecily Begley, Declan Devane

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

4 authors.

Valerie SmithSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, D'Olier Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. smithv1@tcd.ie.
Mike ClarkeNorthern Ireland Network for Trials Methodology Research, Queen's University Belfast, Grosvenor Road, Belfast, BT12 6BA, UK. m.clarke@qub.ac.uk.
Cecily BegleySchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, D'Olier Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. cbegley@tcd.ie.
Declan DevaneSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland. declan.devane@nuigalway.ie.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0901530
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecruitment rates in multi-centre randomised trials often fall below target recruitment rates, causing problems for study outcomes. The Studies Within A Trial (SWAT) Programme, established by the All-Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research in collaboration with the Medical Research Council Network of Hubs in the United Kingdom and others, is developing methods for evaluating aspects of trial methodology through the conduct of research within research. A recently published design for a SWAT-1 provides a protocol for evaluating the effect of a site visit by the principal investigator on recruitment in multi-centre trials.

methodsUsing the SWAT-1 design, the effect of a site visit, with the sole purpose of discussing trial recruitment, on recruitment rates in a large multicentre trial in the Republic of Ireland was evaluated. A controlled before and after intervention comparison was used, where the date of the site visit provides the time point for the intervention, and for the comparison to control sites. Site A received the intervention. Site B and Site C acted as the controls. Z-scores for proportions were calculated to determine within site recruitment differences. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to determine between site recruitment differences.

resultsRecruitment rates were increased in Site A post-intervention (17% and 14% percentage point increases at 1 and 3 months, respectively). No differences in recruitment occurred in Site B or in Site C. Comparing between site differences, at 3 months post-intervention, a statistically significant difference was detected in favour of higher recruitment in Site A (34% versus 25%; odds ratio 1.57, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 2.26).

conclusionsThis is the first reported example of a study in the SWAT programme.. It provides evidence that a site visit, combined with a scheduled meeting, increases recruitment in a clinical trial. Using this example, other researchers might be encouraged to consider conducting a similar study, allowing the findings of future SWAT-1s to be compared and combined, so that higher level evidence on the effect of a site visit by the principal investigator can be obtained. THE ADCAR TRIAL: ISRCTN-96340041 ( www.controlled-trials.com ); date of registration: 25 March 2008.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionResearch PersonnelCardiotocographyConfidence IntervalsData Interpretation, StatisticalFemaleHeart AuscultationHeart Rate, FetalHumansIrelandLabor OnsetOdds RatioPredictive Value of TestsPregnancySample SizeTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID25958221
PMCPMC4429599

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.