ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2022
Recruitment strategies for a post cessation weight management trial: A comparison of strategy cost-effectiveness and sample diversity.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effective and cost-effective strategies for recruiting rural adults into a civic engagement and health behavior change research study.BMC public health · 2026Trial
- Success and cost-effectiveness of strategies to recruit older adults to a behavioral intervention research study.Contemporary clinical trials · 2025Trial
- The Effect of Intervention Preference Matching on Outcomes and Engagement in a Post-cessation Weight Management Trial.American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2025Trial
- Impact of Weight Concern on Post-Cessation Weight Management, Smoking Cessation, and Program Engagement.American journal of health promotion : AJHP · 2024Trial
- Perceived barriers and facilitators to engagement and behavioral enactment in weight management interventions among racial and ethnic minorities.Discover public health · 2026Article
- Perceived Barriers and Facilitators to Engagement and Behavioral Enactment in Weight Management Interventions Among Racial and Ethnic Minorities.Research square · 2025Article
- Article
- Reducing intervention- and research-induced inequalities to tackle the digital divide in health promotion.International journal for equity in health · 2023Article
- Importance of self-weighing to avoid post-cessation weight gain: A secondary analysis of the fit and quit randomized trial.Obesity science & practice · 2023Article
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
Abstract
Background: Effective recruitment of representative and diverse samples in research trials is important to the generalizability of findings and in describing access to behavioral interventions. The current study evaluated the effectiveness of local and national recruitment strategies for a smoking cessation and weight management-focused randomized controlled trial (Fit & Quit). The overall cost-effectiveness of recruitment strategies was also evaluated. Methods: The study initially recruited participants locally in the Memphis, TN area and later transitioned to national recruitment, necessitated by the transition to remote assessment strategies due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The study evaluated effective recruitment strategies for randomized participants ( Results: The most effective recruitment strategies were local postcards, local radio advertisements, word-of-mouth referrals, and national internet advertisements, which resulted in a combined 71.8% ( Conclusion: Results provide information on effective and cost-effective local and national recruitment methods for recruiting underrepresented groups of participants in behavioral clinical intervention studies.
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.