ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)
Recruitment methods and yield rates for a multisite clinical trial exploring risk reduction for Alzheimer's disease (rrAD).
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.). 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.
- Physician referral is associated with recruitment, motivation, and adherence in an exercise intervention study for older adults.Journal of the National Medical Association · 2026Trial
- Evaluating evidence-based recruitment strategies for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias clinical trial research: A literature review.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2026Review
- A Functional Resting-State Network Atlas Based on 420 Older Adults with Hypertension.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Development of a web platform to advance data-driven recruitment for ADRD research.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Research Advance Directives: Ethical Implications for Persons with Alzheimer's Disease, and for the Families of Elderly Dementia Patients.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2025Article
- Plasma p-tau217 andAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
- Recruitment methods and yield rates for a multisite clinical trial exploring risk reduction for Alzheimer's disease (rrAD).Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
- Recruitment and eligibility in a Phase 1 early Alzheimer's disease trial of Sabirnetug.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
- Practical social media recommendations for dementia prevention researchers.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe risk reduction for Alzheimer's disease (rrAD) trial was a multisite clinical trial to assess exercise and intensive vascular pharmacological treatment on cognitive function in community-dwelling older adults at increased risk for Alzheimer's disease.
methodsEligibility, consent, and randomization rates across different referral sources were compared. Informal interviews conducted with each site's project team were conducted upon study completion.
resultsInitially, 3290 individuals were screened, of whom 28% were eligible to consent, 805 consented to participate (87.2% of those eligible), and 513 (36.3% of those consented) were randomized. Emails sent from study site listservs/databases yielded the highest amount (20.9%) of screened individuals. Professional referrals from physicians yielded the greatest percentage of consented individuals (57.1%). Referrals from non-professional contacts (ie, friends, family; 75%) and mail/phone contact from a site (73.8%) had the highest yield of randomization. DISCUSSION: Professional referrals or email from listservs/registries were most effective for enrolling participants. The greatest yield of eligible/randomized participants came from non-professional and mail/phone contacts. Future trials should consider special efforts targeting these recruitment approaches. Highlights: Clinical trial recruitment is commonly cited as a significant barrier to advancing our understanding of cognitive health interventions.The most cited referral source was email, followed by interviews/editorials on the radio, television, local newspapers, newsletters, or magazine articles.The referral method that brought in the largest number of contacts was email but did not result in the greatest yield of consents or eligible participants.The sources that yielded the greatest likelihood of consent were professional referrals (ie, physician), social media, and mail/phone contact from study site.The greatest yield of eligible/randomized participants came from non-professional contacts and mail/phone contact from a site.Findings suggest that sites may need to focus on more selective referral sources, such as using contact mailing and phone lists, rather than more widely viewed recruitment sources, such as social media or TV/radio advertisements.
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.