Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41018123›Full record

ArticleDiscover public health2025

Qualitative evaluation to improve participant engagement and retention in remote COVID-19 treatment trials.

Amaya Perez-Brumer, Rebecca Balasa, Aarti S Doshi, Andrea Bowra, Julien Brisson, Morgan M Philbin, Thuy Doan, Catherine E Oldenburg

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Discover public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Amaya Perez-BrumerDalla School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7 Canada.
Rebecca BalasaDalla School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7 Canada.
Aarti S DoshiDalla School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7 Canada.
Andrea BowraDalla School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7 Canada.
Julien BrissonDalla School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M7 Canada.
Morgan M PhilbinDivision of Vulnerable Populations, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94158 USA.
Thuy DoanFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94158 USA.
Catherine E OldenburgFrancis I. Proctor Foundation, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94158 USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical trials, although recognized as the gold standard for scientific research, encounter various challenges with participant recruitment and retention. Yet, given the surge in global research endeavors during the COVID-19 pandemic, mass recruitment and retention were needed to ensure study power. While participant engagement in clinical research has been investigated, there is limited literature underscoring motivations for participation in COVID-19 clinical trials conducted remotely. To address this gap, we conducted a longitudinal, qualitative evaluation study of participant engagement and retention in a remote, COVID-19 clinical trial. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted between December 2020-March 2021 (timepoint 1;

Indexed as

Clinical trialCOVID-19 researchMotivationsQualitative evaluationRecruitmentRetention

Identifiers

PMID41018123
PMCPMC12460564

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.