ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2025
Knowing is Half the Battle: The Factors Leading to Efficient Recruitment of Representative Samples in Schizophrenia Research.
Article in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increasing participation of people with thought disorder in clinical research.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2026Review
- New Pharmacological Treatment Approaches for Schizophrenia: Navigating the Post-iclepertin Landscape.CNS drugs · 2026Review
- Keep your participants close, but your informants closer? The added value of high and low contact informants to supplement self-report for the cognitive impairment of schizophrenia.Schizophrenia research. Cognition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesDrug development in schizophrenia is limited by the differential scaling of the active treatment and placebo arms of a study, such that, as the number of sites increases, the magnitude of placebo response disproportionately increases. The objective of this article was to identify factors conducive to efficient recruitment as a step towards trial designs allowing recruitment of more participants per site, leading to reduced variability, and potentially a smaller placebo effect. PATIENTS AND
methodsUsing the information of 554 individuals, we calculated the percentage of individuals who were screened, consented, and retained in our research, along with rationale for nonconsent. Independent t tests and Chi-squared tests were performed to compare participant characteristics.
resultsOut of the 273 individuals who were fully screened, 84 did not progress to the consented stage owing to various reasons, leading to a total of 189 individuals who were screened and consented and a total of 365 individuals who were either incompletely screened or not consented into a study. Individuals with an externally validated medical history showed the highest yield in being consented and retained in research as new participants. In particular, chart reviews from clinics were highly efficient (25.8%) in facilitating new participants' enrollment, even when these individuals were not actively/prospectively seeking research. The most common reason for nonconsent was difficulty in telephone or email contact. Consenting and nonconsenting participants were similar in demographics, and recruitment sources only differed in their reported substance use.
conclusionsReferrals and chart reviews from known clinics were the most efficient method in retaining new participants, highlighting the importance of external validation and communication between research and clinical staff within a system. Consenting participants showed no significant differences from the database as a whole, demonstrating that the study samples were representative. Future studies should aim to confirm the present findings at other academic and commercial research centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39794624What 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.