Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27296091›Full record

Trial reportTrials2016

Cost-effective recruitment methods for a large randomised trial in people with diabetes: A Study of Cardiovascular Events iN Diabetes (ASCEND).

Theingi Aung, Richard Haynes, Jill Barton, Jolyon Cox, Aleksandra Murawska, Kevin Murphy, Michael Lay, Jane Armitage, Louise Bowman, ASCEND Study Collaborative Group

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
25.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Design considerations for future renoprotection trials in the era of multiple therapies for chronic kidney disease.Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation : official publication of the European Dialysis and Transplant Association - European Renal Association · 2025
    Article
  11. Design, recruitment and baseline characteristics of the LENS trial.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Embedding routine health care data in clinical trials: with great power comes great responsibility.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Theingi AungRoyal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust, Reading, UK.
Richard HaynesNuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Jill BartonNuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Jolyon CoxNuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Aleksandra MurawskaNuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Kevin MurphyNuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Michael LayNuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Jane ArmitageNuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK.
Louise BowmanNuffield Department of Population Health (NDPH), Clinical Trial Service Unit & Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Richard Doll Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7LF, UK. louise.bowman@ctsu.ox.ac.uk.
ASCEND Study Collaborative Group
Nuffield Health · GBRoyal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation SP/14/3/31114Cancer Research UKMedical Research Council MC_UU_12026/5
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical trials require cost-effective methods for identifying, randomising, and following large numbers of people in order to generate reliable evidence. ASCEND (A Study of Cardiovascular Events iN Diabetes) is a randomised '2 × 2 factorial design' study of aspirin and omega-3 fatty acid supplements for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events in people with diabetes; this study used central disease registers and a mail-based approach to identify, randomise, and follow 15,000 people. In collaboration with UK consultants and general practitioners (GPs), researchers identified potentially eligible people with diabetes from centrally held registers (e.g. for retinopathy screening) and GP-held disease registers. Permission was obtained under section 251 of the National Health Service Act 2006 (previously section 60 of the NHS act 2001) to allow invitation letters to be generated centrally in the name of the holder of the register. In addition, with the collaboration of the National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR) Diabetes and Primary Care Research Networks (DRN and PCRN), general practices sent pre-assembled invitation packs to people with a diagnosis of diabetes. Invitation packs included a cover letter, screening questionnaire (with consent form), information leaflet, and a Freepost envelope. Eligible patients entered a 2-month, pre-randomisation, run-in phase on placebo tablets and were only randomised if they completed a randomisation form and remained willing and eligible at the end of the run-in. Follow-up is ongoing, using mail-based approaches that are being supplemented by central registry data.

resultsInformation on approximately 600,000 people listed on 58 centrally held diabetes registers was obtained, and 300,188 potentially eligible patients were invited to join the study. In addition, 785 GP practices mailed invitations to 120,875 patients. A further 2,340 potential study participants were identified via other routes. In total, 423,403 people with diabetes were invited to take part; 26,462 entered the 2-month, pre-randomisation, run-in phase; and 15,480 were randomised.

conclusionIf sufficient numbers of potentially eligible patients can be identified centrally and the trial treatments do not require participants to attend clinics, the recruitment and follow-up of patients by mail is feasible and cost-effective. Wider use of these methods could allow more, large, randomised trials to be undertaken successfully and cost-effectively.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials, ISRCTN60635500 , registered on 14 July 2005.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsPatient SelectionAspirinCardiovascular DiseasesConsent FormsCost-Benefit AnalysisDiabetes MellitusFatty Acids, Omega-3HumansPlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsPostal ServicePrimary PreventionRegistriesResearch Support as TopicSample SizeSurveys and QuestionnairesAspirinFatty Acids, Omega-3Platelet Aggregation InhibitorsAspirinCardiovascular diseaseDiabetesOmega-3 fatty acidsRandomised controlled trialRecruitment methodology

Identifiers

PMID27296091
PMCPMC4907276
OpenAlexW2431259315

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.