Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35379301›Full record

ArticleTrials2022

Development of a new adapted QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI-Two) for rapid application to RCTs underway with enrolment shortfalls-to identify previously hidden barriers and improve recruitment.

Jenny L Donovan, Marcus Jepson, Leila Rooshenas, Sangeetha Paramasivan, Nicola Mills, Daisy Elliott, Julia Wade, Domenic Reda, Jane M Blazeby, Drew Moghanaki and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

12 authors.

Jenny L Donovan *Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK. jenny.donovan@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6488-5472
Marcus Jepson *Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK.
Leila Rooshenas *Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK.
Sangeetha ParamasivanDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK.
Nicola MillsDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK.
Daisy ElliottDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK.
Julia WadeDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK.
Domenic RedaHines VA Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center and Edward Hines Jr VA Hospital, Chicago, USA.
Jane M BlazebyDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PR, UK.
Drew MoghanakiDepartment of Radiation Oncology Greater Los Angeles VA Health Care System, UCLA Jonsson Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
E Shelley HwangDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, Duke University and Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Louise DaviesVA Outcomes Group, White River Junction, VT, USA.

Funding

Health Technology Assessment Programme 96/20/06, 96/20/99UK Medical Research Council MC_U145079312UK Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany randomised controlled trials (RCTs) struggle to recruit, despite valiant efforts. The QRI (QuinteT Recruitment Intervention) uses innovative research methods to optimise recruitment by revealing previously hidden barriers related to the perceptions and experiences of recruiters and patients, and targeting remedial actions. It was designed to be integrated with RCTs anticipating difficulties at the outset. A new version of the intervention (QRI-Two) was developed for RCTs already underway with enrolment shortfalls.

methodsQRIs in 12 RCTs with enrolment shortfalls during 2007-2017 were reviewed to document which of the research methods used could be rapidly applied to successfully identify recruitment barriers. These methods were then included in the new streamlined QRI-Two intervention which was applied in 20 RCTs in the USA and Europe during 2018-2019. The feasibility of the QRI-Two was investigated, recruitment barriers and proposed remedial actions were documented, and the QRI-Two protocol was finalised.

resultsThe review of QRIs from 2007 to 2017 showed that previously unrecognised recruitment barriers could be identified but data collection for the full QRI required time and resources usually unavailable to ongoing RCTs. The streamlined QRI-Two focussed on analysis of screening/accrual data and RCT documents (protocol, patient-information), with discussion of newly diagnosed barriers and potential remedial actions in a workshop with the RCT team. Four RCTs confirmed the feasibility of the rapid application of the QRI-Two. When the QRI-Two was applied to 14 RCTs underway with enrolment shortfalls, an array of previously unknown/underestimated recruitment barriers related to issues such as equipoise, intervention preferences, or study presentation was identified, with new insights into losses of eligible patients along the recruitment pathway. The QRI-Two workshop enabled discussion of the newly diagnosed barriers and potential remedial actions to improve recruitment in collaboration with the RCT team. As expected, the QRI-Two performed less well in six RCTs at the start-up stage before commencing enrolment.

conclusionsThe QRI-Two can be applied rapidly, diagnose previously unrecognised recruitment barriers, and suggest remedial actions in RCTs underway with enrolment shortfalls, providing opportunities for RCT teams to develop targeted actions to improve recruitment. The effectiveness of the QRI-Two in improving recruitment requires further evaluation.

Indexed as

Research DesignEuropeHumansPatient SelectionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAccrualEnrolmentQuinteT Recruitment InterventionRandomised trialsRecruitmentRecruitment interventionRecruitment shortfallRemedial strategies

Identifiers

PMID35379301
PMCPMC8978173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.