ArticleTrials2025
Research assistants' experiences recruiting patients with psychosis into clinical trials: a qualitative study.
Article in Trials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTreatments for patients diagnosed with psychosis need to be improved. Clinical trials are an important way of assessing the efficacy of new treatments. However, recruiting patients into trials is challenging. This study sought to better understand the reasons for this from the perspective of research assistants.
designA qualitative study underpinned by a critical realist ontology and contextualist epistemology.
methodsResearch assistants who had recruited patients with psychosis into trials, primarily of psychological interventions, were interviewed. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to identify themes.
resultsOverarching themes representing four types of factors influencing recruitment of patients with psychosis into clinical trials were generated: patient, clinical team, research team, and NHS infrastructure. Patients largely wished to take part in trials but needed time to build trust with research assistants. Clinical teams held the power in suggesting patients for trials; therefore, it was essential for research teams to build strong relationships with clinical staff. Research teams recruiting into trials benefited from lived experience expertise, support systems, and institutional knowledge. A key NHS infrastructure factor was that mental health staff had limited time to consider trials for their patients.
conclusionsTrial participation needs to be made more accessible to patients with psychosis, who often want to take part but lack opportunities. Methods of increasing accessibility could include identifying and addressing barriers to referral from clinical teams, employing multiple recruitment strategies, and flexible appointment formats. Qualitative research with clinical teams and patients will also help in developing the understanding of barriers to recruitment.
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.