ArticleBMC medical research methodology2026
Recruitment of older adults to clinical trials in the Emergency Department: A qualitative study with clinical trial stakeholders.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPopulation ageing is contributing to increasing Emergency Department (ED) attendances among older adults. Following an ED visit, this population is particularly vulnerable to adverse outcomes. Although the number of clinical trials evaluating ED-based interventions designed to improve outcomes for older adults and alleviate ED crowding is growing, recruiting older adults into such trials remains a significant challenge.
methodsThis study explored the experiences of clinical trial researchers and recruiters involved in enrolling older adults into ED-based clinical trials. A qualitative descriptive design was employed, using semi-structured interviews and reflexive thematic analysis to examine participants' perspectives.
resultsNine participants were interviewed, and four key themes were identified. First, participants emphasised the importance of tailoring recruitment strategies to reflect older adults' health profiles and autonomy preferences within the ED context. Second, leveraging clinician expertise and established relationships was viewed as a key enabler of successful recruitment. Third, the dynamic and high-pressure nature of the ED environment was identified as a major barrier to engaging older adults in research. Finally, participants underscored the need for recruitment processes that are inclusive and respectful of older adults' individual preferences and circumstances to promote equitable participation in clinical trials.
conclusionStakeholders possess valuable insights into the factors that facilitate or hinder the recruitment of older adults to ED-based trials. Greater inclusivity in trial design-through more flexible eligibility criteria, consent processes, and study protocols-alongside enhanced ED resources, such as dedicated recruitment spaces, may support and sustain the participation of older adults in clinical research.
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.