Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37106576›Full record

Trial reportClinical trials (London, England)2023

Experiences with recruitment and retention of adolescents and emerging adults in a weight loss intervention trial.

Gilbert Horst, Hailey Miller, Anna Peeler, Jeanne Charleston, Thomas Dell, Stephen P Juraschek, Tammy M Brady

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical trials (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Gilbert HorstJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4055-4852
Hailey MillerJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Anna PeelerCicely Saunders Institute of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation, King's College, London, UK.
Jeanne CharlestonJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Thomas DellJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Stephen P JuraschekBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Tammy M BradyJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USKing's College London · GB

Funding

Promoting Heart Healthy Behaviors in Youth.K23HL119622 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BRADY, TAMMY MCLOUGHLIN · 2014 to 2017
$704k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL119622
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsEfficient and effective participant recruitment is key for successful clinical research. Adolescent and emerging adult recruitment into clinical trials can be particularly challenging, especially when targeting underrepresented groups. This study aimed to determine the most successful recruitment strategies from those employed during a pediatric trial testing the efficacy of a behavioral intervention on adiposity and cardiovascular disease risk.

methodsWe determined the effectiveness, cost, and diversity of the final research population by each recruitment method utilized in the EMPower trial, a randomized clinical trial designed to test the effect of a technology-delivered behavioral Healthy Lifestyle intervention on adiposity, blood pressure, and left ventricular mass among adolescents and emerging adults with overweight or obesity. Effectiveness was determined by respondent yield (RY; number of respondents/number contacted), scheduled yield (SY; number scheduled for a baseline visit/number of respondents), enrollment yield (EY; number enrolled/number of respondents), and retention (number completed/number enrolled). Cost-effectiveness of each recruitment method was calculated and demographics of participants recruited via each method was determined.

resultsA minimum of 109,314 adolescents and emerging adults were contacted by at least one recruitment method (clinic, web-based, postal mailing, electronic medical record (EMR) messaging) leading to 429 respondents. The most successful strategies in terms of RY were clinic-based recruitment (n = 47, 61% RY), community web-postings (n = 109, 5.33% RY), and EMR messaging (n = 163, 0.99% RY); however, website, postal mailings, and EMR recruitment led to more successful SY and EY. Postal mailings were the most costly strategy to employ (US$3261/completed participant) with EMR messaging the second most costly (US$69/completed participant). Community web-postings were free of charge. Clinic-based recruitment did not add additional costs, per se, but did require a substantial amount of personnel time (63.6 h/completed participant). Final cohort diversity primarily came from postal mailings (57% Black) and EMR messages (50% female).

conclusionElectronic medical record messaging and web-based recruitment were highly successful and cost-effective strategies in a pediatric clinical trial targeting adolescents and emerging adults, but was less successful in recruiting a diverse cohort. Clinic recruitment and postal mailings, despite being costly and time-consuming, were the strategies that enrolled a greater proportion of underrepresented groups. While online forms of trial recruitment are growing in popularity, clinic-based recruitment and non-web-based strategies may be required to ensure participant diversity and representation.

Indexed as

ObesityResearch DesignAdolescentAdultChildElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHumansMalePatient SelectionWeight Lossclinic-based recruitmentelectronic health record recruitmentelectronic medical record recruitmentPediatric clinical trial recruitmentpediatricsunderrepresented groupsyouth

Identifiers

PMID37106576
PMCPMC10523837
OpenAlexW4367318225

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.