Trial reportContemporary clinical trials2021
Retaining diverse adults with diabetes in a long-term trial: Strategies, successes, and lessons learned.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Cirrhosis Medical Home: A Pilot Randomized Trial of a Collaborative Care Model for Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Re-Consenting Pediatric Research Participants as Legal Adulthood Approaches: Lessons from the SPARK Autism Study.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background Retention can be difficult in longitudinal trials, especially among minoritized groups and individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) who may experience more barriers to research participation. Organized retention strategies may help; however, limited research has reported on this in detail. Methods We employed several strategies throughout a 15-month randomized controlled trial to encourage retention among a diverse sample of adults with type 2 diabetes. Participants were randomized to receive mobile health support for diabetes self-care for 12 months or an attention control. Participants completed assessments at 3, 6, 12, and 15 months post-baseline. We used three main categories of retention strategies: flexibility in participation (e.g., multiple methods for data collection), communication (e.g., tracking contacts), and community building (e.g., study branding, newsletters). We monitored participants' use of strategies and examined associations between participant characteristics and retention. Results Retention remained high (≥90%) at each follow-up assessment. Participants used various methods for survey completion: online (34%), in-person (31%), and mail (30%). Most (73%) used a mail-in A1c kit at least once. Multiple completion methods were important for retaining minoritized and lower SES participants who completed assessments in-person more frequently. Communication also facilitated retention; 39% of participants used a study Helpline and tracking systems helped maintain contact. Conclusions Retaining disadvantaged patients in clinical trials is necessary so findings generalize to and can benefit these populations. Retention strategies that reduce barriers to participation and engage participants and community partners can be successful. Future studies should assess the impact of retention strategies.
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.