ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2023
Precision recruitment for high-risk participants in a COVID-19 cohort study.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in clinical trial participant recruitment and retention: A scoping review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Studies for developing diagnostics and treatments for infectious diseases usually require observing the onset of infection during the study period. However, when the infection base rate incidence is low, the cohort size required to measure an effect becomes large, and recruitment becomes costly and prolonged. We developed a model for reducing recruiting time and resources in a COVID-19 detection study by targeting recruitment to high-risk individuals. Methods: We conducted an observational longitudinal cohort study at individual sites throughout the U.S., enrolling adults who were members of an online health and research platform. Through direct and longitudinal connection with research participants, we applied machine learning techniques to compute individual risk scores from individually permissioned data about socioeconomic and behavioral data, in combination with predicted local prevalence data. The modeled risk scores were then used to target candidates for enrollment in a hypothetical COVID-19 detection study. The main outcome measure was the incidence rate of COVID-19 according to the risk model compared with incidence rates in actual vaccine trials. Results: When we used risk scores from 66,040 participants to recruit a balanced cohort of participants for a COVID-19 detection study, we obtained a 4- to 7-fold greater COVID-19 infection incidence rate compared with similar real-world study cohorts. Conclusion: This risk model offers the possibility of reducing costs, increasing the power of analyses, and shortening study periods by targeting for recruitment participants at higher risk.
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.