ArticleContemporary clinical trials2025
Research recruitment strategies in the digital era: Opportunities and challenges of social media.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical considerations for dense longitudinal neuroimaging: Ten simple rules for frequent scanning over short time periods.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- Telemedicine Adoption for Managing Chronic and Rare Diseases in Indonesia During and Beyond the COVID-19 Era: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEffective recruitment is crucial for clinical research, yet traditional methods can be costly and time-consuming. Digital platforms offer a promising opportunity for reaching broader populations. This paper aims to provide a descriptive analysis of digital and traditional recruitment strategies used to engage women with functional hypothalamic amenorrhea (FHA) and identify the most effective methods.
methodsFrom January 2023 to November 2024, women aged 18-40 were recruited through traditional methods (flyers, referrals, word-of-mouth, health fairs) and digital platforms (Instagram, X, Facebook, Reddit, podcasts, electronic boards, clinical trial websites, data exploration tool). Respondents were categorized into "All", "Consented," and "Completed," then stratified by generation and geographic location. Enrollment and completion rates were calculated.
resultsAmong 220 respondents (mean age 28.0 ± 5.9 years), 74 (34 %) consented, and 47 (21 %) completed participation. Of all responses, Instagram provided the highest recruitment (37 %, n = 82), but had the lowest enrollment rate (17 %). Podcasts and word-of-mouth were also effective, with physician referrals yielding the highest enrollment (80 %) and completion (100 %) rates yet representing one of the lowest recruitment counts (n = 5). While digital strategies had three times more outreach, enrollment and completion rates remained similar to those of traditional methods. Millennials (n = 117) relied more on Facebook and Podcasts, while Gen Z (n = 102) engaged more via electronic boards and Reddit.
conclusionsDigital platforms, particularly social media and podcasts showed significant potential to enhance recruitment efficiency and outreach. However, varying completion rates across methods underscore the importance of a multifaceted approach to ensure participant diversity and study generalizability.
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.