Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2021
The many faces of recruitment in a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Contemporary clinical trials, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The usage of population and disease registries as pre-screening tools for clinical trials, a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a self-directed online psychosocial intervention for women with metastatic breast cancer: Finding My Way-Advanced.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Trial
- Effects of a peer-led physical activity program on psychosocial outcomes among breast cancer survivors.Psycho-oncology · 2024Trial
- Peer mentoring for physical activity adoption and maintenance among breast cancer survivors: moderators of physical activity outcomes.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2023Trial
- Physical Activity Adoption and Maintenance Among Breast Cancer Survivors: A Randomized Trial of Peer Mentoring.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Behind the Numbers: Cancer Survivor Recruitment by Demographics and Clinical Status.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Mindful self-compassion to reduce stigma among individuals diagnosed with lung cancer (MSC-LC): a pilot study protocol for a parallel-group, randomized controlled trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2026Article
- A study protocol for a randomized clinical trial on exposure and effects of pesticides consumption - the PEST-EXPO Brazil study.MethodsX · 2024Article
- Health Coaching Intervention to Improve Self-Care Management of Hypertension Among Older People in Indonesia: A Randomized Controlled Study Protocol.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThoughtful approaches to study recruitment are a critical step in designing and implementing randomized controlled trials. Delays and challenges in recruitment can be costly and can result in smaller than proposed sample sizes which have downstream effects, such as underpowered studies. PURPOSE: The current study evaluated recruitment methods (e.g., targeted mailings, brochures/flyers, social media) and their relationship to eligibility, randomization, participant characteristics and retention at end of a randomized controlled trial of physical activity adoption and maintenance among breast cancer survivors.
methodsScreening data from 874 women was analyzed for recruitment method, study eligibility, randomization and retention through end of treatment. Costs per randomized participant were calculated by recruitment method. Baseline participant characteristics were compared across recruitment methods and between randomized and retained participants.
resultsRates of participant accrual from eligibility screening through randomization differed statistically significantly depending on recruitment method (p < .05). The highest randomization rates were obtained via targeted mailings (88.2%) and lowest via brochure/flyer (0.4%). Among the randomized sample, there were no differences in demographic characteristics between recruitment methods, however, there were differences within the targeted mailings category (registries vs. organizational recruitment). There were statistically significant differences in costs between recruitment methods (p < .001) with lowest (non-negligible) cost being targeted mailings.
conclusionsThe current RCT of breast cancer survivors successfully recruited and retained participants, highlighting the need to combine recruitment methods to achieve accrual goals. Recruitment methods differed substantially in their cost and their ability to attract individuals who would ultimately be randomized.
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.