Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35437247›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

Using qualitative methods in pilot and feasibility trials to inform recruitment and retention processes in full-scale randomised trials: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

Adel Elfeky, Shaun Treweek, Karin Hannes, Hanne Bruhn, Cynthia Fraser, Katie Gillies

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Adel ElfekyDivision of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK Adel.Elfeky@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6579-0929
Shaun TreweekHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Karin HannesResearch Group SoMeTHin'K, Faculty of Social Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Hanne BruhnHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Cynthia FraserHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Katie GilliesHealth Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7890-2854

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo systematically review published pretrial qualitative research studies and explore how their findings were used to inform recruitment and retention processes in full-scale trials.

designQualitative evidence synthesis using thematic analysis. DATA SOURCES AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We conducted a comprehensive search of databases; Dissertation Abstracts International, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, Sociological Abstracts and PsycINFO. We included all reports of pretrial qualitative data on recruitment and retention in clinical trials up to March 2018. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors independently extracted data using a predefined data extraction form that captured study aims, design, methodological approach and main findings, including barriers and facilitators to recruitment and or retention. The synthesis was undertaken using Thomas and Harden's thematic synthesis method and reported following the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research guidelines. Confidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach.

resultsThirty-five papers (connected to 31 feasibility studies) from three different countries, published between 2010 and 2017 were included. All studies were embedded in pilot or feasibility studies to inform design aspects in preparation for a subsequent full-scale trial. Twelve themes were identified as recruitment barriers and three as recruitment facilitators. Two themes were identified as barriers for retention and none as retention facilitators. The findings from qualitative research in feasibility or pilot trials are often not explicitly linked to proposed changes to the recruitment and retention strategies to be used in the future or planned full-scale trial.

conclusionsMany trial teams do pretrial qualitative work with the aim of improving recruitment and retention in future full-scale trials. Just over half of all reports of such work do not clearly show how their findings will change the recruitment and retention strategy of the future trial. The scope of pretrial work needs to expand beyond looking for problems and also look for what might help and spend more time on retention.

Indexed as

Feasibility StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicHumansQualitative ResearchClinical trialsQUALITATIVE RESEARCHSTATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS

Identifiers

PMID35437247
PMCPMC9016401

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.