Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28546093›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical epidemiology2017

Best practice guidance for the use of strategies to improve retention in randomized trials developed from two consensus workshops.

Valerie Brueton, Sally P Stenning, Fiona Stevenson, Jayne Tierney, Greta Rait

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors.

Valerie BruetonFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Department of Adult Nursing, King's College, London, 57 Waterloo Road, London SE1 8WA, UK. Electronic address: valerie.brueton@kcl.ac.uk.
Sally P StenningMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Aviation House, 125 Kingsway, London WC2B 6NH, UK.
Fiona StevensonUCL Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, Royal Free and University College Medical School, Rowland Hill Street, London NW3 2PF, UK.
Jayne TierneyMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Aviation House, 125 Kingsway, London WC2B 6NH, UK.
Greta RaitPRIMENT Clinical Trials Unit, Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, Royal Free and University College Medical School, Rowland Hill Street, London NW3 2PF, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_EX_UU_G0800814Medical Research Council MC_U122792695Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/24
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo develop best practice guidance for the use of retention strategies in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). STUDY DESIGN AND

settingConsensus development workshops conducted at two UK Clinical Trials Units. Sixty-six statisticians, clinicians, RCT coordinators, research scientists, research assistants, and data managers associated with RCTs participated. The consensus development workshops were based on the consensus development conference method used to develop best practice for treatment of medical conditions. Workshops commenced with a presentation of the evidence for incentives, communication, questionnaire format, behavioral, case management, and methodological retention strategies identified by a Cochrane review and associated qualitative study. Three simultaneous group discussions followed focused on (1) how convinced the workshop participants were by the evidence for retention strategies, (2) barriers to the use of effective retention strategies, (3) types of RCT follow-up that retention strategies could be used for, and (4) strategies for future research. Summaries of each group discussion were fed back to the workshop. Coded content for both workshops was compared for agreement and disagreement. Agreed consensus on best practice guidance for retention was identified.

resultsWorkshop participants agreed best practice guidance for the use of small financial incentives to improve response to postal questionnaires in RCTs. Use of second-class post was thought to be adequate for postal communication with RCT participants. The most relevant validated questionnaire was considered best practice for collecting RCT data. Barriers identified for the use of effective retention strategies were: the small improvements seen in questionnaire response for the addition of monetary incentives, and perceptions among trialists that some communication strategies are outdated. Furthermore, there was resistance to change existing retention practices thought to be effective. Face-to-face and electronic follow-up technologies were identified as retention strategies for further research.

conclusionsWe developed best practice guidance for the use of retention strategies in RCTs and identified potential barriers to the use of effective strategies. The extent of agreement on best practice is limited by the variability in the currently available evidence. This guidance will need updating as new retention strategies are developed and evaluated.

Indexed as

CommunicationMotivationResearch PersonnelEducationHumansPatient CompliancePatient DropoutsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomBest practice guidanceConsensus developmentRandomised trialsStrategies to improve retentionWorkshops

Identifiers

PMID28546093
PMCPMC5695658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.