SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2018
Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 343 papers, 10 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
343 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient and public involvement in randomized trials of lifestyle intervention among pregnant women with obesity: An umbrella review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Pooled it
- Study Design Complexity and Participant Completion in Dietary Trials for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Metaresearch Study.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Pooled it
- Identifying Social Media-Based Interactions That Help Adults to Adhere to Weight Loss Goals: A Systematic Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2026Pooled it
- Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in Otolaryngology research: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Recruitment rates and strategies in exercise trials in cancer survivorship: a systematic review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2024Pooled it
- Digital tools for direct assessment of autism risk during early childhood: A systematic review.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2024Pooled it
- The psychosocial impact of childhood dementia on children and their parents: a systematic review.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2023Pooled it
- An Economic Model for Estimating Trial Costs with an Application to Placebo Surgery Trials.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Towards conceptualizing patients as partners in health systems: a systematic review and descriptive synthesis.Health research policy and systems · 2023Pooled it
- A community-based rehabilitation package following hip fracture: FEMuR III a multi-centre RCT, economic and process evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Trial
- Evaluating the utility of a patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) end-of-trial event to re-engage with cell-based therapy participants.Regenerative medicine · 2025Trial
- Generalizability of the Progressive Resistance Training versus Total Hip Arthroplasty (PROHIP) trial: a cross-sectional study of 402 patients in Denmark.Acta orthopaedica · 2025Trial
- Can a Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) Informed Participant Information Leaflet (PIL) Improve Trial Recruitment, Retention, and Quality of Decision Making? Results of a Randomised Controlled Double-Blind Study Within a Trial (SWAT).Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Trial
- The impact of a patient advisory board on a clinical comparative effectiveness trial: a comparison of patient and researcher perspectives.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Trial
- Immunomodulation for Primary Prevention of Urinary Tract Infections in Patients With Spinal Cord Injury or Disease During Primary In-House Rehabilitation: Results From a Randomized Placebo-Controlled Feasibility Trial (UroVaxom-Pilot).Topics in spinal cord injury rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Intranasal Dexmedetomidine for Pain Management in Older Patients: A Cross-Over, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Active-Controlled Trial.Drugs & aging · 2023Trial
- Lived experience-centred word clouds may improve research uncertainty gathering in priority setting partnerships.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Trial
- Enhancing translation capacities of COVID-19 researchers through interdisciplinary collaboration: empathy, awareness, and action.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2026Article
- Building Sustainable Patient Involvement in Rare Condition Research.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2026Article
283 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) on rates of enrolment and retention in clinical trials and explore how this varies with the context and nature of PPI.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Ten electronic databases, including Medline, INVOLVE Evidence Library, and clinical trial registries. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Experimental and observational studies quantitatively evaluating the impact of a PPI intervention, compared with no intervention or non-PPI intervention(s), on participant enrolment and/or retention rates in a clinical trial or trials. PPI interventions could include additional non-PPI components inseparable from the PPI (for example, other stakeholder involvement). DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data on enrolment and retention rates, as well as on the context and characteristics of PPI intervention, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to determine the average effect of PPI interventions on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: main analysis including randomised studies only, secondary analysis adding non-randomised studies, and several exploratory subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
results26 studies were included in the review; 19 were eligible for enrolment meta-analysis and five for retention meta-analysis. Various PPI interventions were identified with different degrees of involvement, different numbers and types of people involved, and input at different stages of the trial process. On average, PPI interventions modestly but significantly increased the odds of participant enrolment in the main analysis (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval and prediction interval 1.01 to 1.34). Non-PPI components of interventions may have contributed to this effect. In exploratory subgroup analyses, the involvement of people with lived experience of the condition under study was significantly associated with improved enrolment (odds ratio 3.14
conclusionsThese findings add weight to the case for PPI in clinical trials by indicating that it is likely to improve enrolment of participants, especially if it includes people with lived experience of the health condition under study. Further research is needed to assess which types of PPI work best in particular contexts, the cost effectiveness of PPI, the impact of PPI at earlier stages of trial design, and the impact of PPI interventions specifically targeting retention. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016043808.
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.