Systematic techniques for assisting recruitment to trials (START): study protocol for embedded, randomized controlled trials

Jo Rick, Jonathan Graffy, Peter Knapp, Nicola Small, David J Collier, Sandra Eldridge, Anne Kennedy, Chris Salisbury, Shaun Treweek, David Torgerson, Paul Wallace, Vichithranie Madurasinghe, Adwoa Hughes-Morley, Peter Bower, Jo Rick, Jonathan Graffy, Peter Knapp, Nicola Small, David J Collier, Sandra Eldridge, Anne Kennedy, Chris Salisbury, Shaun Treweek, David Torgerson, Paul Wallace, Vichithranie Madurasinghe, Adwoa Hughes-Morley, Peter Bower

Abstract

Background: Randomized controlled trials play a central role in evidence-based practice, but recruitment of participants, and retention of them once in the trial, is challenging. Moreover, there is a dearth of evidence that research teams can use to inform the development of their recruitment and retention strategies. As with other healthcare initiatives, the fairest test of the effectiveness of a recruitment strategy is a trial comparing alternatives, which for recruitment would mean embedding a recruitment trial within an ongoing host trial. Systematic reviews indicate that such studies are rare. Embedded trials are largely delivered in an ad hoc way, with interventions almost always developed in isolation and tested in the context of a single host trial, limiting their ability to contribute to a body of evidence with regard to a single recruitment intervention and to researchers working in different contexts.

Methods/design: The Systematic Techniques for Assisting Recruitment to Trials (START) program is funded by the United Kingdom Medical Research Council (MRC) Methodology Research Programme to support the routine adoption of embedded trials to test standardized recruitment interventions across ongoing host trials. To achieve this aim, the program involves three interrelated work packages: (1) methodology - to develop guidelines for the design, analysis and reporting of embedded recruitment studies; (2) interventions - to develop effective and useful recruitment interventions; and (3) implementation - to recruit host trials and test interventions through embedded studies.

Discussion: Successful completion of the START program will provide a model for a platform for the wider trials community to use to evaluate recruitment interventions or, potentially, other types of intervention linked to trial conduct. It will also increase the evidence base for two types of recruitment intervention.

Trial registration: The START protocol covers the methodology for embedded trials. Each embedded trial is registered separately or as a substudy of the host trial.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Exemplar original (left) and optimized (right) participant information sheets[25].
Figure 2
Figure 2
Web-based platform blank template homepage[42].
Figure 3
Figure 3
Web-based platform study-specific pages blank template.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Round 1 recruitment outcomes.

References

    1. McDonald A, Knight R, Campbell M, Entwistle V, Grant A, Cook J, Elbourne D, Francis D, Garcia J, Roberts I, Snowdon C. What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2006;7(9):1–8.
    1. Bower P, Wilson S, Mathers N. How often do UK primary care trials face recruitment delays? Fam Pract. 2007;24:601–603. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmm051.
    1. Sully B, Julious S, Nicholl J. A reinvestigation of recruitment to randomised, controlled, multicenter trials: a review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials. 2013;14:166. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-166.
    1. Centerwatch . State of the Clinical Trials Industry 2009: A Sourcebook of Charts and Statistics. Boston: CenterWatch; 2009. p. 2009.
    1. Tudur Smith C, Hickey H, Clarke M, Blazeby J, Williamson P. The trials methodological research agenda: results from a priority setting exercise. Trials. 2014;15(32):1–7.
    1. Hummers-Pradier E, Scheidt-Naveb C, Martin H, Heinemann S, Kochen M, Himmel W. Simply no time? Barriers to GPs’ participation in primary health care research. Fam Pract. 2008;25:105–112. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmn015.
    1. Salmon P, Peters S, Rogers A, Gask L, Clifford R, Iredale W, Dowrick C, Morriss R. Peering through the barriers in GPs’ explanations for declining to participate in research: the role of professional autonomy and the economy of time. Fam Pract. 2007;24:269–275. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmm015.
    1. de Salis I, Tomlin Z, Toerien M, Donovan J. Using qualitative research methods to improve recruitment to randomized controlled trials: the Quartet study. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008;13:92–96. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2008.008028.
    1. Donovan J, Lane A, Peters T, Brindle L, Saltera E, Gillatt D, Powell P, Bollinae P, Neal D, Hamdy F, ProtecT Study group Development of a complex intervention improved randomization and informed consent in a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:29–36. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.02.010.
    1. Donovan J, Mills N, Smith M, Brindle L, Jacoby A, Peters T, Frankel S, Neal D, Hamdy F. Improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. BMJ. 2002;325:766–770. doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7367.766.
    1. Treweek S, Lockhart P, PitKethly M, Cook J, Kjeldstrøm M, Johansen M, Taskila T, Sullivan F, Wilson S, Jackson C, Jones R, Mitchell E. Methods to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2013;3:e002360. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002360.
    1. Treweek S, Mitchell E, PitKethly M, Cook J, Kjeldstrøm M, Taskila T, Johansen M, Sullivan F, Wilson S, Jackson C, Jones R. Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;4:MR000013.
    1. Ennis L, Wykes T. Impact of patient involvement in mental health research: longitudinal study. Br J Psychiatry. 2013;203:381–386. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.112.119818.
    1. Graffy J, Bower P, Ward E, Wallace P, Delaney B, Kinmonth A, Collier D, Miller J. Trials within trials? Researcher, funder and ethical perspectives on the practicality and acceptability of nesting trials of recruitment methods in existing primary care trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10(38):1–10.
    1. Watson J, Torgerson D. Increasing recruitment to randomised trials: a review of randomised controlled trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6(34):1–9.
    1. Rendell J, Merritt R, Geddes J. Incentives and disincentives to participation by clinicians in randomised controlled trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;2:MR000021.
    1. Raftery J, Bryant J, Powell J, Kerr C, Hawker S. Payment to healthcare professionals for patient recruitment to trials: systematic review and qualitative study. Health Technol Assess. 2008;12:1–128. doi: 10.3310/hta12100.
    1. Bryant J, Powell J. Payment to healthcare professionals for patient recruitment to trials: systematic review. BMJ. 2005;331:1377–1378. doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7529.1377.
    1. Bower P, Wallace P, Ward E, Graffy J, Miller J, Delaney B, Kinmonth A. Improving recruitment to health research in primary care. Fam Pract. 2009;26:391–397. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmp037.
    1. Graffy J, Grant J, Boase S, Ward E, Wallace P, Miller J, Kinmonth A. UK research staff perspectives on improving recruitment and retention to primary care research; nominal group exercise. Fam Pract. 2009;26:48–55. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmn085.
    1. Gillies K, Huang W, Skea Z, Brehaut J, Cotton S. Patient information leaflets (PILs) for UK randomised controlled trials: a feasibility study exploring whether they contain information to support decision making about trial participation. Trials. 2014;15(62):1–10.
    1. Donovan J, Peters T, Noble S, Powell P, Gillatt D, Olivera S, Lane A, Neale D, Hamdy F, ProtecT Study group Who can best recruit to randomized trials? Randomized trial comparing surgeons and nurses recruiting patients to a trial of treatments for localized prostate cancer (the ProtecT study) J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:605–609. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00083-0.
    1. Nilsen E, Myrhaug H, Johansen M, Oliver S, Oxman A. Methods of consumer involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient information material. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;3:CD004563.
    1. Raynor T, Dickinson D. Key principles to guide development of consumer medicine information - content analysis of information design texts. Ann Pharmacother. 2009;43:700–706. doi: 10.1345/aph.1L522.
    1. Knapp P, Raynor D, Silcock J, Parkinson B. Performance-based readability testing of participant information for a Phase 3 IVF trial. Trials. 2009;10(79):1–15.
    1. Knapp P, Raynor D, Silcock J, Parkinson B. Performance-based readability testing of participant materials for a phase I trial: TGN1412. J Med Ethics. 2009;35:573–578. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.026708.
    1. Knapp P, Raynor D, Silcock J, Parkinson B. Can user testing of a clinical trial patient information sheet make it fit-for-purpose? - a randomised controlled trial. BMC Med. 2011;9:89. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-9-89.
    1. Antoniou E, Draper H, Reed K, Burls A, Southwood T, Zeegers M. An empirical study on the preferred size of the participant information sheet in research. J Med Ethics. 2011;37:557–562. doi: 10.1136/jme.2010.041871.
    1. Shneerson C, Windle R, Cox K. Innovating information-delivery for potential clinical trials participants. What do patients want from multi-media resources? Pat Educ Couns. 2013;90:111–117. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.06.031.
    1. Poehlein G. Universities and information technologies for instructional programmes: issues and potential impacts. Technology Analysis and Strategic Assessment. 1996;8(3):283–290. doi: 10.1080/09537329608524251.
    1. Song L, Singleton E, Hill J, Koh M. Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. The Internet and Higher Education. 2004;7:59–70. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2003.11.003.
    1. Horton W. Designing Web-based Training: How to Teach Anyone Anything Anywhere Anytime. New York: Wiley; 2000.
    1. Bower P, Collier D, Eldridge S, Graffy J, Kennedy A, Knapp P, Hughes-Morley A, Rick J, Salisbury C, Small N, Torgerson D, Treweek S, Wallace P. A multimedia intervention to enhance recruitment to clinical trials in primary care and community settings: process of development and evaluation. Trials. 2013;14(Suppl 1):P90. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-S1-P90.
    1. Rozmovits L, Ziebland S. What do patients with prostate or breast cancer want from an Internet site? A qualitative study of information needs. Pat Educ Couns. 2004;53:57–64. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00116-2.
    1. Selwyn N. Older adults’ use of information and communications technology in everyday life. J Aging Stud. 2003;23:561–582.
    1. PRIMER: Primary Care Research in Manchester Engagement Resource. []
    1. . []
    1. Conner M, Norman P. Predicting Health Behaviour: A Social Cognition Approach. In: Conner M, Norman P, editors. Predicting Health Behaviour: Research and Practice with Social Cognition Models. 2. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2005. pp. 1–27.
    1. Michie S, Johnston M, Abraham C, Lawton R, Parker D, Walker A, Psychological Theory Group Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence-based practice: a consensus approach. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005;14:26–33. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2004.011155.
    1. Llewellyn-Thomas H, McGreal M, Thiel E, Fine S, Erlichman C. Patients’ willingness to enter clinical trials: measuring the association with perceived benefit and preference for decision participation. Soc Sci Med. 1991;32:35–42. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(91)90124-U.
    1. Bower P, King M, Nazareth I, Lampe F, Sibbald B. Patient preferences in randomised controlled trials: conceptual framework and implications for research. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61:685–695. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.12.010.
    1. MRC START multimedia blank template. []
    1. Adams G, Gulliford M, Ukoumunne O, Eldridge S, Chinn S, Campbell M. Patterns of intra-cluster correlation from primary care research to inform study design and analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:785–794. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.013.
    1. Smeeth L, Siu-Woon E. Intraclass correlation coefficients for cluster randomized trials in primary care: data from the MRC Trial of the Assessment and Management of Older People in the Community. Control Clin Trials. 2002;23:409–421. doi: 10.1016/S0197-2456(02)00208-8.
    1. Brueton V, Tierney J, Stenning S, Harding S, Meredith S, Nazareth I, Rait G. Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;12:MR000032.
    1. Fletcher B, Gheorghe A, Moore D, Wilson S, Damery S. Improving the recruitment activity of clinicians in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e000496. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000496.
    1. Smith V, Clarke M, Devane D, Begley C, Shorter G, Maguire L. SWAT 1: what effects do site visits by the principal investigator have on recruitment in a multicentre randomized trial? J Evid Based Med. 2014;6:136–137. doi: 10.1111/jebm.12049.
    1. Treweek S. Trial forge: a systematic approach to making trials more efficient. Trials. 2013;14(Suppl 1):O121. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-S1-O121.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅