ArticleTrials2018
Development of a framework to improve the process of recruitment to randomised controlled trials (RCTs): the SEAR (Screened, Eligible, Approached, Randomised) framework.
Article in Trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05547165 (Percutaneous Intervention Versus Observational Trial of Arterial Ductus in Low Weight Infants), which is not on this map. Cited by 65 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.
Percutaneous Intervention Versus Observational Trial of Arterial Ductus in Low Weight Infants
Who cites it
65 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 118 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies for recruitment of adolescent girls into physical activity programmes: a systematic review and regression analysis.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Recruitment strategies in randomised controlled trials of men aged 50 years and older: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2019Pooled it
- Cognitive Orientation to Daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) in Parkinson's: Randomized Trial Findings.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2026Trial
- The clinical and cost-effectiveness of paravertebral blockade versus thoracic epidural blockade in reducing chronic post-thoracotomy pain: TOPIC2 RCT synopsis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Trial
- Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding or sleeve gastrectomy for severe obesity: The By-Band-Sleeve randomised controlled trial.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026Trial
- Packaging-based visual-storytelling nudge to improve antibiotic adherence in uncomplicated urinary tract infection: a pilot randomized trial in Pakistan.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Trial
- Music Interventions in Hyperacute and Acute Stroke Patients: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Feasibility Study.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2025Trial
- The UK resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in trauma patients with life-threatening torso haemorrhage: the (UK-REBOA) multicentre RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Trial
- Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conservative management for adults with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones: the C-GALL RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Trial
- Impact of video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy versus open lobectomy for lung cancer on recovery assessed using self-reported physical function: VIOLET RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Patient characteristics and refusal to participate in a head and neck cancer intervention trial: experience of two tertiary UK head and neck cancer centres.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2022Trial
- Trial
- The many faces of recruitment in a randomized controlled trial.Contemporary clinical trials · 2021Trial
- Open urethroplasty versus endoscopic urethrotomy for recurrent urethral stricture in men: the OPEN RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate cancer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- The implementation and utility of patient screening logs in a multicentre randomised controlled oncology trial.Trials · 2020Trial
- Article
- Observational
- Article
5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResearch has shown that recruitment to trials is a process that stretches from identifying potentially eligible patients, through eligibility assessment, to obtaining informed consent. The length and complexity of this pathway means that many patients do not have the opportunity to consider participation. This article presents the development of a simple framework to document, understand and improve the process of trial recruitment.
methodsEight RCTs integrated a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) into the main trial, feasibility or pilot study. Part of the QRI required mapping the patient recruitment pathway using trial-specific screening and recruitment logs. A content analysis compared the logs to identify aspects of the recruitment pathway and process that were useful in monitoring and improving recruitment. Findings were synthesised to develop an optimised simple framework that can be used in a wide range of RCTs.
resultsThe eight trials recorded basic information about patients screened for trial participation and randomisation outcome. Three trials systematically recorded reasons why an individual was not enrolled in the trial, and further details why they were not eligible or approached, or declined randomisation. A framework to facilitate clearer recording of the recruitment process and reasons for non-participation was developed: SEAR - Screening, to identify potentially eligible trial participants; Eligibility, assessed against the trial protocol inclusion/exclusion criteria; Approach, the provision of oral and written information and invitation to participate in the trial, and Randomised or not, with the outcome of randomisation or treatment received.
conclusionsThe SEAR framework encourages the collection of information to identify recruitment obstacles and facilitate improvements to the recruitment process. SEAR can be adapted to monitor recruitment to most RCTs, but is likely to add most value in trials where recruitment problems are anticipated or evident. Further work to test it more widely is recommended.
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.