Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40051673›Full record

ReviewContemporary clinical trials communications2025

Participant recruitment and retention in randomised controlled trials of melanoma surveillance: A scoping review.

Deonna M Ackermann, Karen Bracken, Jolyn K Hersch, Monika Janda, Robin M Turner, Katy J L Bell

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Deonna M AckermannSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Australia.
Karen BrackenKolling Institute, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Australia.
Jolyn K HerschSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Australia.
Monika JandaCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Robin M TurnerBiostatistics Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Katy J L BellSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This scoping review aims to collate and describe data on recruitment, retention, and strategies used to improve these, in randomised controlled trials of melanoma surveillance. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL databases from inception until October 23, 2023. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts, and full-texts, and one reviewer extracted data (convenience sample (n = 5) checked by a second). Eligibility criteria included: (i) RCT design, (ii) clinical setting, (iii) participants at increased risk of melanoma, (iv) interventions for early melanoma detection, and (v) early detection outcomes or surrogates such as improved skin self-examination. We calculated summary statistics and undertook qualitative data synthesis. Results: From 1746 records, 21 trials (reported in 28 papers) were included. Recruitment sources included dermatology clinics, general practice sites, and hospital databases or registries. Trials reported proportions of those screened who were eligible (mean 75 %, range 24-100 %), proportions of those eligible who were randomised (mean 63 %, range 24-95 %), numbers randomised per month (mean 25 participants, range 2-74), and proportion of those randomised who completed outcome measurements (mean 85 %, range 59-100 %) for self-report questionnaires at primary timepoints). Recruitment strategies included targeted participant identification and flexible consent processes. Retention strategies included setting narrow eligibility criteria, reminders, and financial incentives. Reporting on strategies was limited and there were no reports on effectiveness. Few studies reported recruiter facing initiatives or public and patient involvement. Discussion: More consistent and detailed reporting of recruitment and retention strategies in RCTs is needed, alongside evaluations of their effectiveness.

Identifiers

PMID40051673
PMCPMC11883296

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.