Trial reportAddiction (Abingdon, England)2026
Can a participant-referred 'study buddy' increase retention of rural people who use drugs in research? A multi-site, randomized trial.
April M Young, Kathryn E Lancaster, Miriam R Elman, Sarann Bielavitz, Ryan R Cook, Angela T Estadt, Madison N Enderle, Edward Freeman, Jodi Lapidus, Philip T Korthuis
Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraphTrial report in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2026. 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
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 registryThe 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 literatureWho cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
4 · The recordCorrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
5 · Who and what moneyAuthors and funding
10 authors.
Kathryn E LancasterDepartment of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Miriam R ElmanSchool of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University/Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA.
Madison N EnderleDepartment of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
Edward FreemanDepartment of Epidemiology and Environmental Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.
Jodi LapidusSchool of Public Health, Oregon Health & Science University/Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA.
Funding
Oregon Clinical and Translational Research Institute - The National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)UL1TR002369 · NCATS · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Cynthia D Morris, Christopher G. Slatore · 2017 to 2026
$78.4MKentucky Center for Clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR001998 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI HARTMANN, KATHERINE E, KERN, PHILIP A · 2016 to 2025
$34.2MThe Ohio State University Center for clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR001070 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, REBECCA D · 2013 to 2017
$22.6MPeer-based Retention of people who Use Drugs in Rural Research (PROUD-R2)U01TR002631 · NCATS · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI KORTHUIS, PHILIP TODD, YOUNG, APRIL MARIE · 2018 to 2023
$5.2MKentucky Communities and Researchers Engaging to Halt the Opioid Epidemic (CARE2HOPE)UH3DA044798 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI COOPER, HANNAH LF, YOUNG, APRIL MARIE · 2019 to 2022
$4.4MOregon HIV/Hepatitis and Opioid Prevention and Engagement (OR-HOPE) Study Cost ExtensionUH3DA044831 · NIDA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI KORTHUIS, PHILIP TODD · 2019 to 2022
$4.0MLearning from the COVID-19 pandemic to improve emergency management planning for harm reduction services in rural OhioUH3DA044822 · NIDA · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI GO, VIVIAN F., MILLER, WILLIAM C · 2019 to 2022
$2.5MKentucky Communities & Researchers Engaging to Halt the Opioid Epidemic-CARE2HOPEUG3DA044798 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI COOPER, HANNAH LF, YOUNG, APRIL MARIE · 2017 to 2018
$1.3MThe role of injection partnerships and preferences for reducing HCV risk: Giving a voice to young women in rural Appalachia.K01DA048174 · NIDA · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI LANCASTER, KATHRYN ELIZABETH · 2019 to 2023
$841kTransporting treatment effects from clinical trials to real-world populations with co-occurring opioid and stimulant use disordersK01DA055130 · NIDA · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI COOK, RYAN · 2022 to 2025
$714kThe effect of opioids, stimulants, and the simultaneous use of both on the hepatitis C virus (HCV) cascade of care in rural communities in the United StatesF31DA054752 · NIDA · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ESTADT, ANGELA T · 2022 to 2023
$52kAHRQ HHS K12 HS026370NCATS NIH HHS U01 TR002631NCATS NIH HHS U01TR002631NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001070NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001998NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002369NIDA NIH HHS F31 DA054752NIDA NIH HHS F31DA054752NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA048174NIDA NIH HHS K01DA048174NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA055130NIDA NIH HHS K01DA55130NIDA NIH HHS UG3 DA044798NIDA NIH HHS UH3 DA044798NIDA NIH HHS UH3 DA044822NIDA NIH HHS UH3DA044822NIDA NIH HHS UH3 DA044831NIDA NIH HHS UH3DA044831NIDA NIH HHS UL1TR001070NIDA NIH HHS UL1TR001998NIDA NIH HHS UL1TR002369Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute K12 HS026370
6 · The paper itselfAbstract
aimsTo test the efficacy of a participant-referred "study buddy" intervention compared with standard retention strategies in retaining rural people who use drugs (PWUD) in longitudinal research.
designMulti-site, two-arm, randomized controlled trial.
settingRural counties in Ohio, Oregon, and Kentucky, USA.
participantsPeople enrolled in the Peer-based Retention Of people who Use Drugs in Rural Research (PROUD-R INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants were allocated (1:1, stratified by site), to: [1] standard retention approach involving appointment reminders and contact information updates by study staff (n = 365), or [2] the intervention arm, receiving the standard retention approach and asked to recruit a "study buddy" (n = 374). Study buddies were invited to view a training video and instructed to encourage their intervention participant to attend follow-up appointments. MEASUREMENTS: Intervention, control, and study buddy participants completed interviewer-administered surveys at baseline and at 6 and 12 months. Outcomes included retention at 12 months (primary) and 6 months (secondary).
findingsRetention was 50.3% at 6 months and 46.1% at 12 months. Only 23.5% of intervention participants recruited a study buddy. In intent-to-treat analyses, the intervention did not increase retention at 12 (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-1.47) or 6 (AOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.69-1.34) months.
conclusionsRecruitment of self-identified "study buddies" did not appear to statistically significantly improve retention of rural people who use drugs in this longitudinal study at 6- and 12-month follow-up relative to standard retention approaches.
Indexed as
Patient SelectionRural PopulationSubstance Abuse, IntravenousSubstance-Related DisordersAdultFemaleHumansKentuckyLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedOhioOpioid-Related DisordersOregonPeer GroupYoung Adultattritionclinical trialinjection drug useretentionruralsubstance usetrial design
Identifiers
PMID41287342
PMCPMC12828707
What OpenQuestion holds
Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390