SynthesisTrials2015
A systematic review of training programmes for recruiters to randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- EASL position paper on palliative care in advanced chronic liver disease.JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2026Guideline
- Recruitment rates and strategies in exercise trials in cancer survivorship: a systematic review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2024Pooled it
- Acceptability and Feasibility of an Educational Intervention to Improve Researcher-Participant Interactions in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Clinical Trial: Research Team Feedback on the BRIEF Intervention.American journal of perinatology · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Equipoise across the patient population: optimising recruitment to a randomised controlled trial.Trials · 2017Trial
- Perceptions of Caring Recruitment Among Older Adults: African Americans and Non-Latinx Whites.Nursing researchTrial
- Laparoscopic hysterectomy versus open abdominal hysterectomy for women with a benign gynaecological condition: the LAVA RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Transforming patient recruitment in clinical trials: Communication training to manage uncertainties about risks and benefits.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Article
- Lessons learnt from the multi-centre LAparoscopic Versus Abdominal hysterectomy (LAVA) randomised controlled trial.Facts, views & vision in ObGyn · 2024Article
- Undertaking Studies Within A Trial to evaluate recruitment and retention strategies for randomised controlled trials: lessons learnt from the PROMETHEUS research programme.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Article
- Health care professional recruitment of patients and family carers to palliative care randomised controlled trials: A qualitative multiple case study.Palliative medicine · 2023Article
- Staff training to improve participant recruitment into surgical randomised controlled trials: A feasibility study within a trial (SWAT) across four host trials simultaneously.Research methods in medicine & health sciences · 2023Article
- Clinical trial recruitment in primary care: exploratory factor analysis of a questionnaire to measure barriers and facilitators to primary care providers' involvement.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Article
- Development and evaluation of a novel training program to build study staff skills in equitable and inclusive engagement, recruitment, and retention of clinical research participants.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2022Article
- Placebo comparator group selection and use in surgical trials: the ASPIRE project including expert workshop.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecruitment to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is often difficult. Clinician related factors have been implicated as important reasons for low rates of recruitment. Clinicians (doctors and other health professionals) can experience discomfort with some underlying principles of RCTs and experience difficulties in conveying them positively to potential trial participants. Recruiter training has been suggested to address identified problems but a synthesis of this research is lacking. The aim of our study was to systematically review the available evidence on training interventions for recruiters to randomised trials.
methodsStudies that evaluated training programmes for trial recruiters were included. Those that provided only general communication training not linked to RCT recruitment were excluded. Data extraction and quality assessment were completed by two reviewers independently, with a third author where necessary.
resultsSeventeen studies of 9615 potentially eligible titles and abstracts were included in the review: three randomised controlled studies, two non-randomised controlled studies, nine uncontrolled pre-test/post-test studies, two qualitative studies, and a post-training questionnaire survey. Most studies were of moderate or weak quality. Training programmes were mostly set within cancer trials, and usually consisted of workshops with a mix of health professionals over one or two consecutive days covering generic and trial specific issues. Recruiter training programmes were well received and some increased recruiters' self-confidence in communicating key RCT concepts to patients. There was, however, little evidence that this training increased actual recruitment rates or patient understanding, satisfaction, or levels of informed consent.
conclusionsThere is a need to develop recruiter training programmes that can lead to improved recruitment and informed consent in randomised trials.
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.