Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37735627›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2023

Widening participation - recruitment methods in mental health randomised controlled trials: a qualitative study.

Mais Iflaifel, Charlotte L Hall, Heidi R Green, Andrew Willis, Stefan Rennick-Egglestone, Edmund Juszczak, Mark Townsend, Jennifer Martin, Kirsty Sprange

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Refining the NEED (Needs Examination, Evaluation and Dissemination) Methods for Use in Psychotic Disorders in Belgium: Lessons From the Design Phase.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Co-Production and Implementation of 'Count Me In': A Bottom-Up Approach to Inclusive Research and Participation in a National Health Service in England.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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.

Mais IflaifelNottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Charlotte L HallNIHR MindTech MedTech Co-operative, Institute of Mental Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Innovation Park, Triumph Road, Nottingham, UK.
Heidi R GreenPreviously: Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Andrew WillisCentre for Ethnic Health Research, Leicester/Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Stefan Rennick-EgglestoneSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Edmund JuszczakNottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Mark TownsendNIHR Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre (NETSCC), Southampton, UK.
Jennifer MartinNIHR MindTech MedTech Co-operative, Institute of Mental Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Innovation Park, Triumph Road, Nottingham, UK.
Kirsty SprangeNottingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. kirsty.sprange@nottingham.ac.uk.

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBarriers to mental health research participation are well documented including distrust of services and research; and stigma surrounding mental health. They can contribute to a lack of diversity amongst participants in mental health research, which threatens the generalisability of knowledge. Given the recent widespread use of the internet in medical research, this study aimed to explore the perspectives of key partners on the use of online (e.g. social media) and offline (e.g. in-person) recruitment as an approach to improving diversity in mental health randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

methodsFace-to-face and online interviews/focus groups with researchers working in mental health and Patient and Public Involvement partners in the United Kingdom. Recordings were transcribed and analysed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis.

resultsThree focus groups and three interviews were conducted with a total N = 23 participants. Four overarching themes were identified: (1) recruitment reach; (2) Demographic factors that affect selection of recruitment method; (3) safety of technology, and; (4) practical challenges. Five main factors were identified that affect the choice of recruitment method: age, complexity of mental health problem and stigma, cultural and ethnicity differences and digital divide. The use of online methods was considered more accessible to people who may feel stigmatised by their mental health condition and with a benefit of reaching a wider population. However, a common view amongst participants was that online methods require closer data monitoring for quality of responders, are not fully secure and less trustworthy compared to offline methods that enable participants to build relationships with health providers. Funding, staff time and experience, organisational support, and technical issues such as spam or phishing emails were highlighted as practical challenges facing online recruitment. All participants agreed that using a hybrid approach tailored to the population under study is paramount.

conclusionsThis study highlighted the importance of offering a flexible and multifaceted recruitment approach by integrating online with offline methods to support inclusivity and widening participation in mental health research. The findings will be used to develop considerations for researchers designing RCTs to improve recruitment in mental health research.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchMental DisordersFocus GroupsHumansMental HealthQualitative ResearchRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicDigital divideDiversityInclusivityMental healthRandomised controlled trialsRecruitmentStigmaThematic analysis

Identifiers

PMID37735627
PMCPMC10512591

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.