Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37951890›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2023

The development and acceptability of an educational and training intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials: the TRAIN project.

V Smith, H Delaney, A Hunter, D Torgerson, S Treweek, C Gamble, N Mills, K Stanbury, E Dempsey, M Daly and 7 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

17 authors.

V SmithSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. smithv1@tcd.ie.
H DelaneySchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Dublin, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
A HunterHealth Research Board-Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN), University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
D TorgersonYork Trials Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.
S TreweekHealth Services Research Unit, Trial Forge, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
C GambleLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
N MillsQuinteT, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
K StanburyNational Perinatal Epidemiology Unit (NPEU), Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
E DempseyINFANT Centre, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
M DalyIrish Neonatal Health Alliance, Public and Patient Involvement Contributor, Bray, Co-Wicklow, Ireland.
J O'SheaPublic and Patient Involvement Contributor, Royal Hospital for Children, Glasgow, UK.
K WeatherupPublic and Patient Involvement Contributor, Oxford, UK.
S DeshpandePrincess Royal Hospital, Telford, UK.
M A RyanINFANT Centre, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
J LoweCentre for Trials Research, College of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
G BlackRoyal Hospital for Children and Young People, Edinburgh, UK.
D DevaneHealth Research Board-Trials Methodology Research Network (HRB-TMRN), University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K025643/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuboptimal or slow recruitment affects 30-50% of trials. Education and training of trial recruiters has been identified as one strategy for potentially boosting recruitment to randomised controlled trials (hereafter referred to as trials). The Training tRial recruiters, An educational INtervention (TRAIN) project was established to develop and assess the acceptability of an education and training intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials. In this paper, we report the development and acceptability of TRAIN.

methodsTRAIN involved three sequential phases, with each phase contributing information to the subsequent phase(s). These phases were 1) evidence synthesis (systematic review of the effectiveness of training interventions and a content analysis of the format, content, and delivery of identified interventions), 2) intervention development using a Partnership (co-design/co-creation) approach, and 3) intervention acceptability assessments with recruiters to neonatal trials.

resultsTRAIN, accompanied by a comprehensive intervention manual, has been designed for online or in-person delivery. TRAIN can be offered to recruiters before trial recruitment begins or as refresher sessions during a trial. The intervention consists of five core learning outcomes which are addressed across three core training units. These units are the trial protocol (Unit 1, 50 min, trial-specific), understanding randomisation (Unit 2, 5 min, trial-generic) and approaching and engaging with parents (Unit 3, 70 min, trial-generic). Eleven recruiters to neonatal trials registered to attend the acceptability assessment training workshops, although only four took part. All four positively valued the training Units and resources for increasing recruiter preparedness, knowledge, and confidence. More flexibility in how the training is facilitated, however, was noted (e.g., training divided across two workshops of shorter duration). Units 2 and 3 were considered beneficial to incorporate into Good Clinical Practice Training or as part of induction training for new staff joining neonatal units.

conclusionTRAIN offers a comprehensive co-produced training and education intervention for recruiters to neonatal trials. TRAIN was deemed acceptable, with minor modification, to neonatal trial recruiters. The small number of recruiters taking part in the acceptability assessment is a limitation. Scale-up of TRAIN with formal piloting and testing for effectiveness in a large cluster randomised trial is required.

Indexed as

Patient SelectionResearch DesignHumansInfant, NewbornRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicIntervention developmentNeonatal trialsTraining recruitersTrial recruitment

Identifiers

PMID37951890
PMCPMC10638723

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.