Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31077231›Full record

ArticleTrials2019

Factors associated with recruitment to randomised controlled trials in general practice: protocol for a systematic review.

Keith R Moffat, Paul Cannon, Wen Shi, Frank Sullivan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Principal Investigators' Perceptions on Factors Associated with Successful Recruitment in Clinical Trials.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2023
    Article
  6. Uncovering key clinical trial features influencing recruitment.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
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

4 authors.

Keith R MoffatPopulation and Behavioural Science Division, School of Medicine, Medical & Biological Sciences, North Haugh, St Andrews, UK. krm9@st-andrews.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7417-9264
Paul CannonInformation Services, University of Glasgow, Hillhead Street, Glasgow, G12 8QE, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8721-1481
Wen ShiPopulation and Behavioural Science Division, School of Medicine, Medical & Biological Sciences, North Haugh, St Andrews, UK.
Frank SullivanPopulation and Behavioural Science Division, School of Medicine, Medical & Biological Sciences, North Haugh, St Andrews, UK.

Funding

University of St Andrews PhD Stipend
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) are frequently unable to recruit sufficient numbers of participants. This affects the trial's ability to answer the proposed research question, wastes resources and can be unethical. RCTs within a general practice setting are increasingly common and similarly face recruitment challenges. The aim of the proposed review is to identify factors that are associated with recruitment rates to RCTs in a general practice setting. These results will be used in further research to predict recruitment to RCTs. METHODS/

designThe electronic databases Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, NTIS and OpenGrey will be searched for relevant articles with no limit on the date of publication. BMC Trials will be manually searched for the past 5 years. Both quantitative and qualitative studies will be included if they have studied recruitment within a general practice RCT. Only English language publications will be included. Screening, quality assessment and data extraction will be conducted by two review authors not blinded to study characteristics. Disagreement will be resolved by discussion and the involvement of a third review author if required. A narrative synthesis of the studies included will be performed. DISCUSSION: The review will, for the first time, systematically synthesise existing research on factors associated with recruitment rates to RCTs in general practice. By identifying research gaps to be prioritised in further research, it will be of interest to academics. It will also be of value to clinical trialists who are involved in the complex task of improving trial recruitment. Our team will use the findings to inform a prediction model of trial recruitment using machine learning. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42018100695 . Registered on 03 July 2018.

Indexed as

General PracticePatient SelectionResearch DesignSystematic Reviews as TopicHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSample Sizegeneral practicerandomised controlled trialrecruitment

Identifiers

PMID31077231
PMCPMC6511135

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.