Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26407547›Full record

Trial reportTrials2015

Recruitment challenges in clinical research including cancer patients and their caregivers. A randomized controlled trial study and lessons learned.

Karin Sygna, Safora Johansen, Cornelia M Ruland

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readComparative 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. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT01867723 phase1completednot on this map

Improving Symptom Management for Cancer Patients and Their Caregivers Through Internet Support: A Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorOslo University HospitalRan2012 to 2015Enrolled560ConditionsFatigueArmsInternet communication application
NCT04090177 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of a Peer-led eHealth Wheelchair Skills Training Program: Training to Enhance Adaptation and Management for Wheelchair Users

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ManitobaRan2021 to 2024Enrolled54ConditionsMobility LimitationArmsTEAM Wheels
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation to reduce ileus after colorectal surgery: randomized feasibility trial and efficacy assessment (IDEAL Stage 2B).Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024
    Trial
  7. Feasibility of a Multi-Component Strengths-Building Intervention for Caregivers of Persons With Heart Failure.Journal of applied gerontology : the official journal of the Southern Gerontological Society · 2023
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Karin SygnaCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. karin.sygna@rr-research.no.
Safora JohansenCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. sjh@ous-hf.no.
Cornelia M RulandCenter for Shared Decision Making and Collaborative Care Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. cornelia.ruland@rr-research.no.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo test seven different strategies for recruitment in a randomized controlled trial, to report documented response data from each strategy, and to discuss recruitment challenges.

methodsWe used 5 opt-in (potential participants have to do something active to contact or be contacted by the researcher) and 2 opt-out (potential participants have the option to decline being contacted about a study) recruitment strategies from February 2013 until July 2014 to contact 1562 cancer patient candidates for participation in a randomized controlled trial. For each of these cancer patients a caregiver was also invited to take part in the study.

resultsOf the 1562 candidates, 22.6 % were ineligible on initial contact, 56.7 % declined to participate on initial contact, and 8.9 % agreed orally to participate but did not complete the enrollment. The 2 opt-out strategies, on-site recruitment and routine care letters recruitment, yielded the highest number of recruited participants with 79 dyads and 58 dyads respectively, constituting 42.7 % and 31.4 % of the total number of enrolled candidates. The 5 opt-in recruitment approaches yielded 49 dyads for the study. Almost half of these dyads were recruited using the approach termed "relying on providers at the hospital."

conclusionsIn this study, opt-out recruitment strategies appeared to be the most effective.

trial registrationRegistration number NCT01867723 , registered February 2012.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient SelectionAdvertisingCaregiversCorrespondence as TopicEligibility DeterminationHumansInformation DisseminationMass MediaNeoplasmsNorwayPamphletsResearch SubjectsSample Size

Identifiers

PMID26407547
PMCPMC4583740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.