Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36475092›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2023

Recruitment challenges for a prospective telehealth cohort study.

Kellie Pertl, Ritwika Petluri, Katharina Wiest, Kim Hoffman, Dennis McCarty, Ximena A Levander, Brian Chan, Stephen A Martin, P Todd Korthuis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. ΔJournal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors.

Kellie PertlBoulder Care, Portland, OR, USA.
Ritwika PetluriBoulder Care, Portland, OR, USA.
Katharina WiestBoulder Care, Portland, OR, USA.
Kim HoffmanOHSU - PSU School of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Dennis McCartyOHSU - PSU School of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Ximena A LevanderAddiction Medicine Section, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Brian ChanAddiction Medicine Section, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Stephen A MartinBoulder Care, Portland, OR, USA.
P Todd KorthuisOHSU - PSU School of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

Evaluating the Usability, Efficacy and Commercial Utility of a Digital Platform to Deliver Comprehensive Treatment for Opioid Use DisorderR44DA050354 · NIDA · BOULDER CARE, INC. · PI PAPES, STEPHANIE · 2019 to 2022
$1.7M
Identifying High Utilizing Patients with Opioid Use Disorder to Engage in Primary CareK23DA053390 · NIDA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Brian Chan · 2022 to 2026
$886k
NIDA NIH HHS K23 DA053390NIDA NIH HHS R44 DA050354
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic presents challenges in participant recruitment strategies for clinical research involving people with opioid use disorders recently engaged in treatment. We describe challenges to participant recruitment in a trial comparing virtual buprenorphine treatment platform to office-based buprenorphine treatment. Methods: The parent study was a cohort trial of telehealth delivered buprenorphine treatment compared to office-based buprenorphine treatment, however, due to the pandemic potential participant recruitment for both arms became virtual. Between 9/27/2021 and 7/11/2022, telephone, email, flyers, and word-of-mouth were used to recruit study participants from each treatment setting. Recruitment tracking documents recorded the primary outcomes: number of outreach attempts and most effective contact methods. Results: Treatment settings provided contact information for 1485 potential study participants. Information was incorrect or disconnected for 282 (19%) individuals, 695 (47%) did not respond to outreach, and 508 (34%) responded to outreach. Of these responders, 369 were interested in study participation, 259 completed the online informed consent and screening assessment, and 148 met eligibility criteria and enrolled in the study. A total of 3804 virtual outreach attempts across 1485 potential participants were made, resulting in an average of 2.7 attempts per contact and a mean of 25.7 attempts per enrolled participant (n = 148). Conclusion: Conducting research during the COVID-19 pandemic required shifting from in-person to virtual recruitment strategies to contact and engage potential study participants. Virtual recruitment for this population during a pandemic appears to be less efficient and hindered efforts to meet recruitment goals.

Indexed as

BuprenorphineCOVID-19Opioid Use DisorderRecruitment challengesTelemedicineVirtual recruitment

Identifiers

PMID36475092
PMCPMC9715261

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.