ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
"And Then He Got into the Wrong Group": A Qualitative Study Exploring the Effects of Randomization in Recruitment to a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurological Teleconsultations in General Practice: A Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA neurology · 2026Trial
- Trial
- "I'll leave that to the case managers." Healthcare Service Providers' Perceptions of Organizational Readiness for Change in a Randomized Controlled Trial-A Qualitative Analysis Exploring Implementation Success.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- A Cross-Provider Healthcare Management Program for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial in 22 German Companies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Patterning in Patient Referral to and Uptake of a National Exercise Referral Scheme (NERS) in Wales From 2008 to 2017: A Data Linkage Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Trial
- Between a rock and a hard place: balancing roles of clinician and co-researcher in a primary health care setting - A qualitative study.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2026Article
- The importance of reminders and patient preferences to improve inhaler technique in older adults with COPD.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Challenges of Recruiting Patients Into Group-Based Stroke Rehabilitation Research: Reflections on Clinician Equipoise Within the Singing for People With Aphasia (SPA) Pilot Trial.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Occupational Physicians' Perspectives on Determinants of Employee Participation in a Randomized Controlled Musculoskeletal Health Promotion Measure: A Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) are regarded as the most internally valid means of estimating the effectiveness of complex public health interventions, but the recruitment of participants can be difficult. The aim of this study was to explore factors that may have affected the recruitment of employees with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) to a multicenter worksite health promotion program from the perspective of recruiting case managers.
methodsFactors in recruitment to the RCT were explored using three focus group discussions with case managers. Data were processed using MAXQDA and analyzed with a combination of content and sequence analysis.
resultsFindings showed that randomization is a major challenge for recruitment. Case managers adapted their communication with, and approaches to possible participants because of the randomization design and employed coping strategies to compensate for allocation into the control arm of the study. Perceptions of the superiority of the intervention group over the control group, perceptions of the (mis)match of participants to one of the groups, as well as the understanding of the necessity of randomization for effectiveness evaluations, further affected recruitment. Perceived expectations of possible participants and their (emotional) reactions to the randomization allocation also complicated recruitment.
conclusionWe were able to gain insight into the challenges of randomization for the recruitment of participants to a multicenter RCT. This study assisted the development of strategies to overcome barriers in the ongoing implementation process of the trial (i.e., the adaption of best practice information sheets and newsletters). There remains a need to develop effective interventions to help those recruiting to trials.
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.