ArticleBJGP open2020
Factors affecting patient recruitment to trials: qualitative research in general practice.
Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experiences of general practice teams and their patients with clinical research-a mixed-methods process evaluation of the Bavarian Research Practice Network (BayFoNet).BMC primary care · 2025Trial
- Patient engagement in protocol development for rare disease clinical trials: a framework.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- 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
- Participation and Refusal in an Implementation Trial: Insights from the Accelerating Cervical Cancer Elimination through the Integration of Screen-and-Treat Services (ACCESS) Study.Research square · 2026Article
- Using media to enhance paediatric patient recruitment for research in primary care.Primary health care research & development · 2025Article
- Factors that influence the uptake of virtual care solutions in Australian primary care practice: a systematic scoping review.JBI evidence implementation · 2025Article
- The Regulate your Sitting Time (RESIT) intervention for reducing sitting time in individuals with type 2 diabetes: findings from a randomised-controlled feasibility trial.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2024Article
- Recruiting general practitioners and older patients with multimorbidity to randomized trials.Family practice · 2023Article
- Evaluation of factors associated with recruitment rates in early phase clinical trials based on the European Clinical Trials Register data.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Article
- The multimorbidity collaborative medication review and decision making (MyComrade) study: a pilot cluster randomised trial in two healthcare systems.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2022Article
- Article
- Practices and Attitudes of Swiss Stakeholders Regarding Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trial Funding Acquisition and Cost Management.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Article
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
backgroundPatient recruitment to clinical research is often challenging and, when inadequate, can result in delayed or underpowered studies. Recruitment problems were experienced during a study of women with heavy menstrual bleeding in general practice (the MIRA trial). Although efforts were made to reduce the burden of the study for those participating, patient recruitment was still an issue.
aimTo identify the barriers and facilitators associated with patient recruitment to clinical trials, as experienced by GPs. DESIGN &
settingA qualitative study was performed in Dutch general practice, using semi-structured interviews.
methodGPs participating in the MIRA trial were selected by purposive sampling and interviewed until saturation was reached. Three independent researchers performed data coding and thematic analysis. Consensus on the identified themes was reached by discussion among the researchers.
resultsSixteen GPs were interviewed. The following factors were noted to influence recruitment: the incidence of the disease under study; awareness of the study; attitude towards scientific research; perceived burden for the patient; usual care by the GP; time investment; characteristics of the GP and their practice; and patient experience of research participation.
conclusionThe identified barriers and facilitators associated with patient recruitment highlight the areas in which future studies can be improved. Indeed, benefits could be gained by simply ensuring that study procedures are clear, by requiring limited (time) investment from the GP, and by investing in personal communication and reminders to keep the GP motivated and interested. Placing greater importance on scientific research during the GP training programme could also serve as a means to motivate future GPs to integrate scientific research in their clinical practice.
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.