Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35232299›Full record

Trial reportClinical trials (London, England)2022

Recruiting an underserved, difficult to reach population into a cancer trial: Strategies from the

B R Simon Rosser, Morgan Wright, Chris J Hoefer, Elizabeth J Polter, Nidhi Kohli, Christopher W Wheldon, Ryan Haggart, Kristine Mc Talley, Darryl Mitteldorf, Gunna Kilian and 3 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical trials (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Sexual and Gender Minority Invisibility in Cancer Studies: A Call for Effective Recruitment Methods to Address Cancer Disparities.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

B R Simon RosserDivision of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8862-531X
Morgan WrightDivision of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3227-0243
Chris J HoeferDivision of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Elizabeth J PolterDivision of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Nidhi KohliDepartment of Educational Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Christopher W WheldonDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, College of Public Health, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Ryan HaggartDepartment of Urology, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Kristine Mc TalleyAdult and Gerontological Health Cooperative, School of Nursing, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Darryl MitteldorfMalecare Cancer Support, New York, NY, USA.
Gunna KilianDivision of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Badrinath R KonetyDepartment of Urology, Rush Medical College, Chicago, IL, USA.
Michael W RossDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
William WestDepartment of Writing Studies, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Funding

Restore: Improving Sexual Outcomes of Gay and Bisexual Prostate Cancer SurvivorsR01CA218657 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI ROSSER, B R SIMON · 2017 to 2021
$3.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA218657
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsSexual minorities are small and under-researched populations that are at disproportionate risk for cancer and poor cancer outcomes. Described as a "hidden population," the principal research challenge has been to develop effective methods to identify and recruit such cancer patients into cancer studies. Online recruitment strategies, as well as targeted clinic recruitment using patient-entered sexual orientation and gender identity data from electronic medical records have potential to transform recruitment, but studies testing the effects of how to recruit using these have not been published.

methodsIn 2019, we conducted a naturalistic, three-arm, stratified prospective study to compare three recruitment strategies: (a) clinic based recruitment of prostate cancer patients from gay health and urology clinics; (b) directly from the gay community; and (c) online recruitment (through cancer support, sex/dating, and social sites). For each strategy, we estimated time, workload, and direct costs involved. To study how recruitment strategy may affect sampling, we tested for retention rates, demographic and outcome differences across sites. Using these methods, we successfully recruited 401 gay and bisexual prostate cancer patients into a randomized, controlled, 24-month trial testing an online sexual and urinary rehabilitation curriculum tailored for this population.

resultsThere were seven key results. First, it is possible to recruit substantial numbers of sexual minority men into prostate cancer studies provided online recruitment methods are used. Second, we observed big differences in dropout during study onboarding by recruitment source. Third, within online recruitment, the online sex/dating application (app) was the most successful and efficient, followed by the cancer support site, and then the social networking site. Fourth, while clinics were the cheapest source of recruitment, they were time intensive and low in yield. Fifth, the cancer support site and sex/dating app recruits differed by several characteristics, with the former being more rehabilitation-focused while the latter were younger and more sexually active. Sixth, we found almost no differences in outcomes across the three online recruitment sites. Seventh, because retention in online studies has been a concern, we confirm very low attrition at 3- and 6 months into the trial.

conclusionFor sexual minority cancer research, more research on how to use sexual orientation and gender identity electronic medical record data for clinic-based recruitment is needed. For other small or hard-to-reach populations, researchers should compare and publish online versus offline recruitment strategies.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsSexual and Gender MinoritiesGender IdentityHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesSexual Behaviorbisexualclinic recruitmentgaygay community recruitmentHidden populationsonline recruitmentrecruitment costrecruitment effortsexual minority

Identifiers

PMID35232299
PMCPMC9232867

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.