ArticleTrials2026
What statistical methods are more appropriate for predicting recruitment at the design stage of a randomised controlled trial?
Article in Trials, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEffective prediction and monitoring of recruitment in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is critical to ensuring the target sample size is met, with 37% of trials failing to do so. This research aimed to identify various statistical methods for predicting recruitment during the design stage of an RCT and implement them using case-study trials, with a view to determining which method is more appropriate.
methodsVarious deterministic, Poisson and Bayesian methods were identified and applied to data from six previously conducted RCTs, with varying numbers of participants recruited, sites opened, durations and recruitment outcomes.
resultsPoisson methods were found to be more appropriate for obtaining predictions at the design stage of a trial. They produced confidence intervals to model uncertainty, unlike deterministic methods, and exhibited narrower intervals than Bayesian methods using informative priors. For single-centre trials, a homogeneous Poisson process was recommended, whilst a Non-homogeneous Poisson Process could be more suitable for multicentre trials. However, the non-homogeneous approach yielded more conservative estimates and required site-specific start dates, which may be less readily available at the design stage. Limitations included a lack of usable software for method implementation, difficulties with parameter elicitation, and a lack of additional data required to implement more complex methods, all of which may hinder the application of statistical methods for predicting recruitment which occurs in only 10% of RCTs.
conclusionsTo enhance transparency and reproducibility, it is recommended that RCTs publish the methods and parameters used in recruitment predictions. This may improve their accuracy, thereby reducing the cost and minimising the research waste associated with insufficient recruitment. Further research across a wider range of trials and methods may also be required due to the complexity of factors which influence recruitment and the variability in the accuracy of statistical methods across trials.
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.