ArticleNPJ primary care respiratory medicine2015
Preventing and Lessening Exacerbations of Asthma in School-aged children Associated with a New Term (PLEASANT): Recruiting Primary Care Research Sites-the PLEASANT experience.
Article in NPJ primary care respiratory medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- What works to recruit general practices to trials? A rapid review.HRB open research · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Self-reported and routinely collected electronic healthcare resource-use data for trial-based economic evaluations: the current state of play in England and considerations for the future.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Article
- Can a customer relationship management program improve recruitment for primary care research studies?Primary health care research & development · 2018Article
- Supplementing electronic health records through sample collection and patient diaries: A study set within a primary care research database.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2018Observational
- Economic Evaluations Alongside Efficient Study Designs Using Large Observational Datasets: the PLEASANT Trial Case Study.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecruitment of general practices and their patients into research studies is frequently reported as a challenge. The Preventing and Lessening Exacerbations of Asthma in School-aged children Associated with a New Term (PLEASANT) trial recruited 142 general practices, across England and Wales and delivered the study intervention to time and target.
aimsTo describe the process of recruitment used within the cluster randomised PLEASANT trial and present results on factors that influenced recruitment.
methodsData were collected on the number of and types of contact used to gain expression of interest and subsequent randomisation into the PLEASANT trial. Practice size and previous research experience were also collected.
resultsThe mean number of contacts required to gain expression of interest were m=3.01 (s.d. 1.6) and total number of contacts from initial invitation to randomisation m=6.8 (s.d. 3.5). Previous randomised controlled trial involvement (hazard ratio (HR)=1.81 (confidence interval (CI) 95%, 1.55-2.11) P<0.001) and number of studies a practice had previously engaged in (odds ratio (OR) 1.91 (CI 95%, (1.52-2.42)) P<0.001), significantly influenced whether a practice would participate in PLEASANT. Practice size was not a significant deciding factor (OR=1.04 (95% CI 0.99-1.08) P=0.137).
conclusionsRecruitment to time and target can be achieved in general practice. The amount of resource required for site recruitment should not, however, be underestimated and multiple strategies for contacting practices should be considered. General practitioners with more research experience are more likely to participate in studies.
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.