ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2023
Uncovering key clinical trial features influencing recruitment.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recruitment and Retention Strategies for Historically Marginalized Populations in Colorectal Cancer Trials: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Using Systematic Review Methods.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2024Pooled it
- A randomized safety and feasibility crossover trial of two Mediterranean-ketogenic interventions in individuals with Parkinson's disease.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2026Trial
- Clinician-led, single-blind, randomised controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of a high-intensity resistance and impact training intervention for improving health-related quality of life in people with multiple sclerosis: protocol for STRONG-MS.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2026Article
- Wearable AI for on-device frailty assessment.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Article
- Representation is power: traditional, hybrid, and digital recruitment results from a non-randomized clinical trial engaging adolescents.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- CLEAR: A vision to support clinical evidence lifecycle with continuous learning.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2025Article
- A scoping review of artificial intelligence applications in clinical trial risk assessment.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Scientia pro bono humani generis: Science for the benefit of humanity.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Clinical researchers' insights on key data for eligibility screening in clinical studies.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Patterns of Enrollment of Traditionally Underrepresented Patients in ECOG-ACRIN Sponsored Breast Cancer Therapeutic Clinical Trials.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Randomized clinical trials (RCT) are the foundation for medical advances, but participant recruitment remains a persistent barrier to their success. This retrospective data analysis aims to (1) identify clinical trial features associated with successful participant recruitment measured by accrual percentage and (2) compare the characteristics of the RCTs by assessing the most and least successful recruitment, which are indicated by varying thresholds of accrual percentage such as ≥ 90% vs ≤ 10%, ≥ 80% vs ≤ 20%, and ≥ 70% vs ≤ 30%. Methods: Data from the internal research registry at Columbia University Irving Medical Center and Aggregated Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov were collected for 393 randomized interventional treatment studies closed to further enrollment. We compared two regularized linear regression and six tree-based machine learning models for accrual percentage (i.e., reported accrual to date divided by the target accrual) prediction. The outperforming model and Tree SHapley Additive exPlanations were used for feature importance analysis for participant recruitment. The identified features were compared between the two subgroups. Results: CatBoost regressor outperformed the others. Key features positively associated with recruitment success, as measured by accrual percentage, include government funding and compensation. Meanwhile, cancer research and non-conventional recruitment methods (e.g., websites) are negatively associated with recruitment success. Statistically significant subgroup differences (corrected Conclusion: This multi-source retrospective study highlighted key features influencing RCT participant recruitment, offering actionable steps for improvement, including flexible recruitment infrastructure and appropriate participant compensation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.