Development of an online resource for recruitment research in clinical trials to organise and map current literature

Background Recruiting the target number of participants within the pre-specified time frame agreed with funders remains a common challenge in the completion of a successful clinical trial and addressing this is an important methodological priority. While there is growing research around recruitment, navigating this literature to support an evidence-based approach remains difficult. The Online resource for Recruitment Research in Clinical triAls project aims to create an online searchable database of recruitment research to improve access to existing evidence and to identify gaps for future research. Methods MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Methodology Register, Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index within the ISI Web of Science and Education Resources Information Center were searched in January 2015. Search strategy results were screened by title and abstract, and full text obtained for potentially eligible articles. Studies reporting or evaluating strategies, interventions or methods used to recruit patients were included along with case reports and studies exploring reasons for patient participation or non-participation. Eligible articles were categorised as systematic reviews, nested randomised controlled trials and other designs evaluating the effects of recruitment strategies (Level 1); studies that report the use of recruitment strategies without an evaluation of impact (Level 2); or articles reporting factors affecting recruitment without presenting a particular recruitment strategy (Level 3). Articles were also assigned to 1, or more, of 42 predefined recruitment domains grouped under 6 categories. Results More than 60,000 records were retrieved by the search, resulting in 56,030 unique titles and abstracts for screening, with a further 23 found through hand searches. A total of 4570 full text articles were checked; 2804 were eligible. Six percent of the included articles evaluated the effectiveness of a recruitment strategy (Level 1), with most of these assessing aspects of participant information, either its method of delivery (33%) or its content and format (28%). Discussion Recruitment to clinical trials remains a common challenge and an important area for future research. The online resource for Recruitment Research in Clinical triAls project provides a searchable, online database of research relevant to recruitment. The project has identified the need for researchers to evaluate their recruitment strategies to improve the evidence base and broaden the narrow focus of existing research to help meet the complex challenges faced by those recruiting to clinical trials.

[1]  C. Gamble,et al.  Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership – the PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study , 2018, Trials.

[2]  Paula R. Williamson,et al.  Trial Forge Guidance 1: what is a Study Within A Trial (SWAT)? , 2018, Trials.

[3]  S. Treweek,et al.  Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials. , 2018, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[4]  M. Sydes,et al.  Global health trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise , 2018, Trials.

[5]  Daniel Hind,et al.  Recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials funded and published by the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Programme , 2017, BMJ Open.

[6]  D. Altman,et al.  The COMET Initiative database: progress and activities update (2015) , 2017, Trials.

[7]  P. Sandercock,et al.  Methods to improve patient recruitment and retention in stroke trials , 2016, International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society.

[8]  V. Madurasinghe,et al.  Guidelines for reporting embedded recruitment trials , 2016, Trials.

[9]  Helen McAneney,et al.  The SWAT (study within a trial) programme; embedding trials to improve the methodological design and conduct of future research , 2015, Trials.

[10]  D. Altman,et al.  The COMET initiative database: progress and activities update (2014) , 2015, Trials.

[11]  C. Hewitt,et al.  Producing better evidence on how to improve randomised controlled trials , 2015, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  Tim Ramsay,et al.  Unsuccessful trial accrual and human subjects protections: An empirical analysis of recently closed trials , 2015, Clinical trials.

[13]  P. Bower,et al.  Systematic techniques for assisting recruitment to trials (START): study protocol for embedded, randomized controlled trials , 2014, Trials.

[14]  P. Bower,et al.  Interventions to improve recruitment and retention in clinical trials: a survey and workshop to assess current practice and future priorities , 2014, Trials.

[15]  P. Williamson,et al.  The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise , 2014, Trials.

[16]  G. Rait,et al.  Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials , 2013, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[17]  Jon Nicholl,et al.  A reinvestigation of recruitment to randomised, controlled, multicenter trials: a review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies , 2013, Trials.

[18]  Jonathan C. Craig,et al.  Strategies for Increasing Recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials: Systematic Review , 2010, PLoS medicine.

[19]  Frank Sullivan,et al.  Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials. , 2010, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[20]  H. Taylor Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children in Clinical Trials: Opinions of Research Ethics Board Administrators , 2009, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[21]  J. Darbyshire The UK Clinical Research Network--building a world-class infrastructure for clinical research. , 2008, Rheumatology.

[22]  Peter Bower,et al.  Short report: how often do UK primary care trials face recruitment delays? , 2007, Family practice.

[23]  Mike Clarke,et al.  Standardising outcomes for clinical trials and systematic reviews , 2007, Trials.

[24]  I Roberts,et al.  Strategies to improve recruitment to research studies. , 2002, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[25]  Investigators' assessment of NIH mandated inclusion of women and minorities in research. , 2006, Contemporary clinical trials.

[26]  David J Torgerson,et al.  Increasing recruitment to randomised trials: a review of randomised controlled trials , 2006, BMC medical research methodology.

[27]  Claire Snowdon,et al.  Does it matter if clinicians recruiting for a trial don't understand what the trial is really about? Qualitative study of surgeons' experiences of participation in a pragmatic multi-centre RCT , 2007, Trials.

[28]  D. Bereczki,et al.  The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews , 2003 .

[29]  R. Prescott,et al.  Factors that limit the quality, number and progress of randomised controlled trials. , 1999, Health technology assessment.