Search

Long-term use of anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS) might lead to distressing withdrawal symptoms following cessation. This paper aims to share challenges in recruiting patients to a pilot intervention study with parallel substance use disorder (SUD) treatment and to explore barriers to participation among AAS forum members. Eligible AAS-dependent men were recruited to receive hormone therapy for 16 weeks, and exclusion reasons were registered. Audience engagement from social media advertisements was measured. Information about the study was posted in an AAS online forum, and discussion among forum members was thematically analyzed. Twelve of 81 potential participants were included, whereas ten completed the intervention. Participants were excluded due to residency outside the study area, illicit substance use or severe medical conditions. Challenges in recruitment were linked to the COVID-19 pandemic, funding and advertisements on social media. AAS forum members suggested modifications to the intervention, were skeptical to the SUD-patient requirement, feared prosecution or other negative outcomes and/or preferred to seek online advice on self-initiated testosterone replacement therapy or post cycle therapy. AAS-related online recommendations among peers, criminalized AAS use setting and obligatory SUD treatment might have affected recruitment. Based on lessons learned, recommendations for future similar studies are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The provision of good services for guests relies on the recruitment and selection process of a company. Good recruitment process is important as it helps the Human Resources’ department select the ideal person for the company. Ideally the person chosen needs to be motivated and perform their work as per company standards. Recruitment is therefore a good investment to consolidate and invest in human capital. Recruitment is an important asset for accommodation establishments. Locally, there are a lot of job opportunities within the hospitality industry. It is difficult to find good and enough personnel to satisfy the various available work positions since a lot of foreign workers decided to move back to their country when the pandemic started and remained in their country until now. The aim of this research is to explore the recruitment processes in various Maltese accommodation establishments. Additionally, this research focuses on the challenges that Human Resources’ departments are facing in recruitment. What kind of help are Human Resources’ departments obtaining from the Government of Malta and Government-related entities to tackle the issue of lack of applicants? Another aspect of this research is to see what kind of professional qualifications are deemed important by the hotel industry. The qualitative analysis of recruitment in this research is conducted by interviewing various Maltese accommodation establishments. The results suggest that there are a lot of similarities between the properties interviewed and the recruitment practices and they struggle to find personnel that can work within their property. This research suggests that the higher the star category of the property, the more intense the recruitment process seems to be. All establishments interviewed seem to give priority to employ people that are motivated and willing to work even if they don’t have experience in the field. Accommodation establishments are willing to invest and train these people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic presents challenges in participant recruitment strategies for clinical research involving people with opioid use disorders recently engaged in treatment. We describe challenges to participant recruitment in a trial comparing virtual buprenorphine treatment platform to office-based buprenorphine treatment. Methods: The parent study was a cohort trial of telehealth delivered buprenorphine treatment compared to office-based buprenorphine treatment, however, due to the pandemic potential participant recruitment for both arms became virtual. Between 9/27/2021 and 7/11/2022, telephone, email, flyers, and word-of-mouth were used to recruit study participants from each treatment setting. Recruitment tracking documents recorded the primary outcomes: number of outreach attempts and most effective contact methods. Results: Treatment settings provided contact information for 1485 potential study participants. Information was incorrect or disconnected for 282 (19%) individuals, 695 (47%) did not respond to outreach, and 508 (34%) responded to outreach. Of these responders, 369 were interested in study participation, 259 completed the online informed consent and screening assessment, and 148 met eligibility criteria and enrolled in the study. A total of 3804 virtual outreach attempts across 1485 potential participants were made, resulting in an average of 2.7 attempts per contact and a mean of 25.7 attempts per enrolled participant (n = 148). Conclusion: Conducting research during the COVID-19 pandemic required shifting from in-person to virtual recruitment strategies to contact and engage potential study participants. Virtual recruitment for this population during a pandemic appears to be less efficient and hindered efforts to meet recruitment goals.

Understanding the experiences of community oncology practices in recruiting informal (unpaid/family) caregivers into research studies can inform strategies to improve caregiver enrollment. We used data from the 2022 National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) Landscape Assessment to describe the experience of recruiting informal caregivers for research studies in community oncology practices. Among 258 practice groups, only one-third (30%, 78/258) reported prior experience recruiting informal caregivers for research studies. In multivariable logistic analyses, having a greater number of oncology providers (increase per 10 providers, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.31) and having advanced practice providers (APPs) involved in research (AOR 2.17, 95% CI 1.05-4.48) were significantly associated with prior experience recruiting caregivers. In conclusion, many community oncology practices lack caregiver recruitment experience and may benefit from education, integration of APPs/caregiver stakeholders in research infrastructure, and/or other strategies to improve caregiver recruitment., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Abstract Background Randomised controlled trials in surgery can be a challenge to design and conduct, especially when including a non-surgical comparison. As few as half of initiated surgical trials reach their recruitment target, and failure to recruit is cited as the most frequent reason for premature closure of surgical RCTs. The aim of this qualitative evidence synthesis was to identify and synthesise findings from qualitative studies exploring the challenges in the design and conduct of trials directly comparing surgical and non-surgical interventions. Methods A qualitative evidence synthesis using meta-ethnography was conducted. Six electronic bibliographic databases (Medline, Central, Cinahl, Embase and PsycInfo) were searched up to the end of February 2018. Studies that explored patients’ and health care professionals’ experiences regarding participating in RCTs with a surgical and non-surgical comparison were included. The GRADE-CERQual framework was used to assess confidence in review findings. Results In total, 3697 abstracts and 49 full texts were screened and 26 published studies reporting experiences of patients and healthcare professionals were included. The focus of the studies (24/26) was primarily related to the challenge of recruitment. Two studies explored reasons for non-compliance to treatment allocation following randomisation. Five themes related to the challenges to these types of trials were identified: (1) radical choice between treatments; (2) patients’ discomfort with randomisation: I want the best treatment for me as an individual; (3) challenge of equipoise: patients’ a priori preferences for treatment; (4) challenge of equipoise: clinicians’ a priori preferences for treatment and (5) imbalanced presentation of interventions. Conclusion The marked dichotomy between the surgical and non-surgical interventions was highlighted in this review as making recruitment to these types of trials particularly challenging. This review identified factors that increase our understanding of why patients and clinicians may find equipoise more challenging in these types of trials compared to other trial comparisons. Trialists may wish to consider exploring the balance of potential factors influencing patient and clinician preferences towards treatments before they start recruitment, to enable issues specific to a particular trial to be identified and addressed. This may enable trial teams to make more efficient considered design choices and benefit the delivery of such trials.

The percentage of females in the U.S. fire service is low. In 2018, only 8% of firefighters were women (National Fire Protection Association [NFPA], 2020). To better understand the reasons for this low participation rate, we analyzed responses from telephone interviews and focus groups conducted with 87 firefighters and fire service leaders in 2013. Analysis of these responses identified several reasons why it is so difficult to recruit and retain women firefighters. A better understanding of these reasons, including the unique challenges that women firefighters face, is essential to increasing and supporting their active participation in this profession. Tactics used to improve the recruitment and retention of women in the fire service are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Randomised controlled trials in surgery can be a challenge to design and conduct, especially when including a non-surgical comparison. As few as half of initiated surgical trials reach their recruitment target, and failure to recruit is cited as the most frequent reason for premature closure of surgical RCTs. The aim of this qualitative evidence synthesis was to identify and synthesise findings from qualitative studies exploring the challenges in the design and conduct of trials directly comparing surgical and non-surgical interventions.Methods: A qualitative evidence synthesis using meta-ethnography was conducted. Six electronic bibliographic databases (Medline, Central, Cinahl, Embase and PsycInfo) were searched up to the end of February 2018. Studies that explored patients' and health care professionals' experiences regarding participating in RCTs with a surgical and non-surgical comparison were included. The GRADE-CERQual framework was used to assess confidence in review findings.Results: In total, 3697 abstracts and 49 full texts were screened and 26 published studies reporting experiences of patients and healthcare professionals were included. The focus of the studies (24/26) was primarily related to the challenge of recruitment. Two studies explored reasons for non-compliance to treatment allocation following randomisation. Five themes related to the challenges to these types of trials were identified: (1) radical choice between treatments; (2) patients' discomfort with randomisation: I want the best treatment for me as an individual; (3) challenge of equipoise: patients' a priori preferences for treatment; (4) challenge of equipoise: clinicians' a priori preferences for treatment and (5) imbalanced presentation of interventions.Conclusion: The marked dichotomy between the surgical and non-surgical interventions was highlighted in this review as making recruitment to these types of trials particularly challenging. This review identified factors that increase our understanding of why patients and clinicians may find equipoise more challenging in these types of trials compared to other trial comparisons. Trialists may wish to consider exploring the balance of potential factors influencing patient and clinician preferences towards treatments before they start recruitment, to enable issues specific to a particular trial to be identified and addressed. This may enable trial teams to make more efficient considered design choices and benefit the delivery of such trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Growing evidence suggests that many people do not see the differences between relationship education (RE) and couples therapy (CT). In fact, many lack information regarding the details and processes included in both RE and CT. If the differences are not understood, fewer people may be inclined to attend RE. RE has experienced various recruitment challenges over the years. The Theory of Planned Behavior illustrates how attitudes and intentionality are linked. If participants gain knowledge about a service, their attitudes about that service and intentions to participate change. For this study, an online module was created to provide information on the details and processes entailed in RE and CT, and the differences between RE and CT. A sample of 224 participants was randomly assigned to a treatment group (n = 112), who received a pretest, the module, and the posttest, or a control group (n = 112), who received the pretest and posttest only. Results showed that participation in the online module had significant effects on RE knowledge, attitudes, and intentions to participate.

Abstract Background Despite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and prioritise important unanswered trial recruitment questions for research. The PRioRiTy study - Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) included members of the public approached to take part in a randomised trial or who have represented participants on randomised trial steering committees, health professionals and research staff with experience of recruiting to randomised trials, people who have designed, conducted, analysed or reported on randomised trials and people with experience of randomised trials methodology. Methods This partnership was aided by the James Lind Alliance and involved eight stages: (i) identifying a unique, relevant prioritisation area within trial methodology; (ii) establishing a steering group (iii) identifying and engaging with partners and stakeholders; (iv) formulating an initial list of uncertainties; (v) collating the uncertainties into research questions; (vi) confirming that the questions for research are a current recruitment challenge; (vii) shortlisting questions and (viii) final prioritisation through a face-to-face workshop. Results A total of 790 survey respondents yielded 1693 open-text answers to 6 questions, from which 1880 potential questions for research were identified. After merging duplicates, the number of questions was reduced to 496. Questions were combined further, and those that were submitted by fewer than 15 people and/or fewer than 6 of the 7 stakeholder groups were excluded from the next round of prioritisation resulting in 31 unique questions for research. All 31 questions were confirmed as being unanswered after checking relevant, up-to-date research evidence. The 10 highest priority questions were ranked at a face-to-face workshop. The number 1 ranked question was “How can randomised trials become part of routine care and best utilise current clinical care pathways?” The top 10 research questions can be viewed at www.priorityresearch.ie. Conclusion The prioritised questions call for a collective focus on normalising trials as part of clinical care, enhancing communication, addressing barriers, enablers and motivators around participation and exploring greater public involvement in the research process.

Abstract Background Recruitment of participants is particularly challenging in primary care, with less than a third of randomised controlled trials (RCT) achieving their target within the original time frame. Participant identification, consent, randomisation and data collection can all be time-consuming. Trials recruiting an incident, as opposed to a prevalent, population may be particularly affected. This paper describes the impact of a deferred recruitment model in a RCT of antibiotics for children with infected eczema in primary care, which required the recruitment of cases presenting acutely. Methods Eligible children were identified by participating general practitioners (GPs) and referred to a study research nurse, who then visited them at home. This allowed the consent and recruitment processes to take place outside the general practice setting. Information was recorded about patients who were referred and recruited, or if not, the reasons for non-recruitment. Data on recruitment challenges were collected through semi-structured interviews and questionnaires with a sample of participating GPs. Data were thematically analysed to identify key themes. Results Of the children referred to the study 34% (58/171) were not recruited – 48% (28/58) because of difficulties arranging a baseline visit within the defined time frame, 31% (18/58) did not meet the study inclusion criteria at the time of nurse assessment, and 21% (12/58) declined participation. GPs had positive views about the recruitment process, reporting that parents valued and benefitted from additional contact with a nurse. GPs felt that the deferred recruitment model did not negatively impact on the study. Conclusions GPs and parents recognised the benefits of deferred recruitment, but these did not translate into enhanced recruitment of participants. The model resulted in the loss of a third of children who were identified by the GP as eligible, but not subsequently recruited to the study. If the potential for improving outcomes in primary care through complex studies is to be realised, new approaches to recruitment into primary care trials need to be developed and evaluated. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials, ISRCTN96705420 . Registered on 27 June 2012.

E-commerce start-ups in India have been on rise since last decade, offering numerous product choices to customers. But the start-ups cannot sustain and flourish only on the vision of entrepreneur. They need right employees to take the vision forward. Recruiting for start-ups is a challenge as start-ups are not in a position to offer what an established business house can. This study aims to find the key challenges faced by start-ups in acquiring the right, retainable, desired talent. This study has been carried out with the support of secondary sources as well as primary sources in form of personal interview with Human Resource personnel, hiring managers and the founders of the organizations selected; and a few recruitment consultants who serve e-commerce consultants. Findings suggest a strong inclination of startups towards applicants with Tier-1 education institutes' qualification and/or those coming from reputed big groups. Leadership qualities, flexibility, energetic and self-motivated, and the value/culture congruence of candidates with the organization are some of the key attributes as desired by them. High growth oriented, with almost no gestation period, and ambiguous nature of the start-ups during initial growing years throw a challenge whilst recruiting the desired talent. In today's competing era, start-ups also face competition from established groups. Whilst on applicants' front, though there are people willing to move from established groups to start-ups, job stability is one of the key concerns on the applicants' minds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite the problem of inadequate recruitment to randomised trials, there is little evidence to guide researchers on decisions about how people are effectively recruited to take part in trials. The PRioRiTy study aimed to identify and prioritise important unanswered trial recruitment questions for research. The PRioRiTy study - Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) included members of the public approached to take part in a randomised trial or who have represented participants on randomised trial steering committees, health professionals and research staff with experience of recruiting to randomised trials, people who have designed, conducted, analysed or reported on randomised trials and people with experience of randomised trials methodology.Methods: This partnership was aided by the James Lind Alliance and involved eight stages: (i) identifying a unique, relevant prioritisation area within trial methodology; (ii) establishing a steering group (iii) identifying and engaging with partners and stakeholders; (iv) formulating an initial list of uncertainties; (v) collating the uncertainties into research questions; (vi) confirming that the questions for research are a current recruitment challenge; (vii) shortlisting questions and (viii) final prioritisation through a face-to-face workshop.Results: A total of 790 survey respondents yielded 1693 open-text answers to 6 questions, from which 1880 potential questions for research were identified. After merging duplicates, the number of questions was reduced to 496. Questions were combined further, and those that were submitted by fewer than 15 people and/or fewer than 6 of the 7 stakeholder groups were excluded from the next round of prioritisation resulting in 31 unique questions for research. All 31 questions were confirmed as being unanswered after checking relevant, up-to-date research evidence. The 10 highest priority questions were ranked at a face-to-face workshop. The number 1 ranked question was "How can randomised trials become part of routine care and best utilise current clinical care pathways?" The top 10 research questions can be viewed at www.priorityresearch.ie .Conclusion: The prioritised questions call for a collective focus on normalising trials as part of clinical care, enhancing communication, addressing barriers, enablers and motivators around participation and exploring greater public involvement in the research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recruitment of participants is particularly challenging in primary care, with less than a third of randomised controlled trials (RCT) achieving their target within the original time frame. Participant identification, consent, randomisation and data collection can all be time-consuming. Trials recruiting an incident, as opposed to a prevalent, population may be particularly affected. This paper describes the impact of a deferred recruitment model in a RCT of antibiotics for children with infected eczema in primary care, which required the recruitment of cases presenting acutely.Methods: Eligible children were identified by participating general practitioners (GPs) and referred to a study research nurse, who then visited them at home. This allowed the consent and recruitment processes to take place outside the general practice setting. Information was recorded about patients who were referred and recruited, or if not, the reasons for non-recruitment. Data on recruitment challenges were collected through semi-structured interviews and questionnaires with a sample of participating GPs. Data were thematically analysed to identify key themes.Results: Of the children referred to the study 34% (58/171) were not recruited - 48% (28/58) because of difficulties arranging a baseline visit within the defined time frame, 31% (18/58) did not meet the study inclusion criteria at the time of nurse assessment, and 21% (12/58) declined participation. GPs had positive views about the recruitment process, reporting that parents valued and benefitted from additional contact with a nurse. GPs felt that the deferred recruitment model did not negatively impact on the study.Conclusions: GPs and parents recognised the benefits of deferred recruitment, but these did not translate into enhanced recruitment of participants. The model resulted in the loss of a third of children who were identified by the GP as eligible, but not subsequently recruited to the study. If the potential for improving outcomes in primary care through complex studies is to be realised, new approaches to recruitment into primary care trials need to be developed and evaluated.Trial Registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials, ISRCTN96705420 . Registered on 27 June 2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recruiting minority groups such as Arab Americans (Ar-Am) for research studies has been challenging. To date no studies were found that explicitly addressed challenges to recruit Ar-Am for sensitive research. The purpose of this article is to present the challenges across three pilot studies that involved Ar-Am samples and the strategies that were implemented to overcome these challenges. The challenges faced with conducting studies with Ar-Am included difficulty for participants to express emotions, influence of male/female authority to consent for the study, lack of trust to disclose sensitive information, language barrier, and slow recruitment. Having bilingual female recruiters of Arabic descent, engaging the women's family members in the consent process, and addressing the sensitive topics in culturally appropriate language were effective strategies to overcome these challenges. These strategies might be helpful for other researchers who recruit Ar-Am for sensitive research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To explore the practice of experienced stroke nurse researchers to understand the issues they face in recruiting participants. Background Participant recruitment is one of the greatest challenges in conducting clinical research, with many trials failing due to recruitment problems. Stroke research is a particularly difficult area in which to recruit; however various strategies can improve participation. Discussion Analysis revealed three main types of problems for recruiting participants to stroke research: those related to patients, those related to the nurse researcher, and those related to the study itself. Impairments affecting capacity to consent, the acute recruitment time frame of most stroke trials, paternalism by nurse researchers, and low public awareness were especially pertinent. Conclusion The disabling nature of a stroke, which often includes functional and cognitive impairments, and the acute stage of illness at which patients are appropriate for many trials, make recruiting patients particularly complex and challenging. Implications for practice An awareness of the issues surrounding the recruitment of stroke patients may help researchers in designing and conducting trials. Future work is needed to address the complexities of obtaining informed consent when patient capacity is compromised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic presents challenges in participant recruitment strategies for clinical research involving people with opioid use disorders recently engaged in treatment. We describe challenges to participant recruitment in a trial comparing virtual buprenorphine treatment platform to office-based buprenorphine treatment., Methods: The parent study was a cohort trial of telehealth delivered buprenorphine treatment compared to office-based buprenorphine treatment, however, due to the pandemic potential participant recruitment for both arms became virtual. Between 9/27/2021 and 7/11/2022, telephone, email, flyers, and word-of-mouth were used to recruit study participants from each treatment setting. Recruitment tracking documents recorded the primary outcomes: number of outreach attempts and most effective contact methods., Results: Treatment settings provided contact information for 1485 potential study participants. Information was incorrect or disconnected for 282 (19%) individuals, 695 (47%) did not respond to outreach, and 508 (34%) responded to outreach. Of these responders, 369 were interested in study participation, 259 completed the online informed consent and screening assessment, and 148 met eligibility criteria and enrolled in the study. A total of 3804 virtual outreach attempts across 1485 potential participants were made, resulting in an average of 2.7 attempts per contact and a mean of 25.7 attempts per enrolled participant (n = 148)., Conclusion: Conducting research during the COVID-19 pandemic required shifting from in-person to virtual recruitment strategies to contact and engage potential study participants. Virtual recruitment for this population during a pandemic appears to be less efficient and hindered efforts to meet recruitment goals., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Ms. Pertl reported being an employee of Boulder Care. Ms. Petluri reported being an employee of Boulder Care. Dr. Wiest reported being a consultant of Boulder Care. Dr. Martin reported being an employee of Boulder Care. The other authors declare they have no competing interests. To reduce potential conflict of interest, OHSU researchers served as final manuscript reviewers and corresponding author., (© 2022 Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: To test seven different strategies for recruitment in a randomized controlled trial, to report documented response data from each strategy, and to discuss recruitment challenges.Methods: We used 5 opt-in (potential participants have to do something active to contact or be contacted by the researcher) and 2 opt-out (potential participants have the option to decline being contacted about a study) recruitment strategies from February 2013 until July 2014 to contact 1562 cancer patient candidates for participation in a randomized controlled trial. For each of these cancer patients a caregiver was also invited to take part in the study.Results: Of the 1562 candidates, 22.6 % were ineligible on initial contact, 56.7 % declined to participate on initial contact, and 8.9 % agreed orally to participate but did not complete the enrollment. The 2 opt-out strategies, on-site recruitment and routine care letters recruitment, yielded the highest number of recruited participants with 79 dyads and 58 dyads respectively, constituting 42.7 % and 31.4 % of the total number of enrolled candidates. The 5 opt-in recruitment approaches yielded 49 dyads for the study. Almost half of these dyads were recruited using the approach termed "relying on providers at the hospital."Conclusions: In this study, opt-out recruitment strategies appeared to be the most effective.Trial Registration: Registration number NCT01867723 , registered February 2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Recruiting acutely ill patients to participate in research can be challenging. This paper outlines the difficulties the first author encountered in a study and the steps she took to overcome problems with research ethics, gain access to participants and implement a recruitment protocol in multiple hospitals. It also compares these steps with literature related to recruitment. Aim To inform and inspire neophyte researchers about the need for planning and resilience when dealing with recruitment challenges in multiple hospitals. Discussion The multiple enablers and barriers to the successful implementation of a hospital-based study recruitment protocol are explored based on a neophyte researcher's optimistic assumptions about this stage of the study. Conclusions Perseverance, adequately planning for contingencies, and accepting the barriers and challenges to recruitment are essential for completing one's research study and ensuring fulfilment as a researcher. Implications for practice Healthcare students carrying out research require adequate knowledge about conducting hospital-based, patient research to inform their recruitment plan. Maximising control over recruitment, allowing for adequate time to conduct data collection, and maintaining a good work ethic will help to ensure success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Recruitment is one of the most serious challenges in performing randomized controlled trials. Often clinical trials with participants diagnosed with schizophrenia are terminated prematurely because of recruitment challenges resulting in a considerable waste of resources in the form of time, funding, and the participants' efforts. Dropout rates in schizophrenia trials are also high. Recruitment challenges are often due to patients not wanting to participate in research but can also be due to clinicians' concerns regarding individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia as participants in research. This paper reports how overcoming recruitment challenges not related to patients revealed high readiness to take part and low dropout rates in a one year long randomized controlled trial testing Guided Self-Determination (GSD) among outpatients with schizophrenia receiving treatment in Assertive Outreach Teams in the northern part of Denmark. Methods GSD is a shared decision-making and mutual problem-solving method using reflection sheets, which was developed in diabetes care and adjusted for this study and utilized by patients with schizophrenia. Descriptive data on strategies to overcome recruitment challenges were derived from notes and observations made during the randomized controlled trial testing of GSD in six outpatient teams. Results Three types of recruitment challenges not related to patients were identified and met during the trial: 1) organizational challenges, 2) challenges with finding eligible participants and 3) challenges with having professionals invite patients to participate. These challenges were overcome through: 1) extension of time, 2) expansion of the clinical recruitment area and 3) encouragement of professionals to invite patients to the study. Through overcoming these challenges, we identified a remarkably high patient-readiness to take part (101 of 120 asked accepted) and a low dropout rate (8%). Conclusion Distinction between recruitment challenges was important in discovering the readiness among patients with schizophrenia to take part in and complete a trial with the GSD- intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Caregivers for a family member with dementia experience chronic long-term stress that may benefit from new complementary therapies such as mindfulness-based stress reduction. Little is known however, about the challenges of recruiting and retaining family caregivers to research on mind–body based complementary therapies. Our pilot study is the first of its kind to successfully recruit caregivers for a family member with dementia to a randomized controlled pilot study of mindfulness-based stress reduction. The study used an array of recruitment strategies and techniques that were tailored to fit the unique features of our recruitment sources and employed retention strategies that placed high value on establishing early and ongoing communication with potential participants. Innovative recruitment methods including conducting outreach to health plan members and generating press coverage were combined with standard methods of community outreach and paid advertising. We were successful in exceeding our recruitment goal and retained 92% of the study participants at post-intervention (2months) and 90% at 6months. Recruitment and retention for family caregiver interventions employing mind–body based complementary therapies can be successful despite many challenges. Barriers include cultural perceptions about the use and benefit of complementary therapies, cultural differences with how the role of family caregiver is perceived, the use of group-based designs requiring significant time commitment by participants, and travel and respite care needs for busy family caregivers. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: To explore the challenges of recruiting ovarian cancer patients and healthy controls to a cancer biobanking study.Study Design and Setting: The study was set up in gynecological cancer centers in 10 National Health Service trusts across the United Kingdom. Women were approached if they were undergoing investigations/awaiting treatment for ovarian cancer, had a previous diagnosis of ovarian cancer, or were attending for annual screening in an ovarian cancer screening trial. Those who consented completed a detailed epidemiologic questionnaire, provided blood and tissue samples if appropriate.Results: The overall proportion of those recruited compared with the expected targets was 76.4% for healthy controls, 86.0% for old cases, and 46.9% for new cases. Only 4 of 10 (40%) centers recruited over 50% of their target for new cases. Unwillingness to participate was reported as primarily because of patients being too unwell, wanting to focus only on their treatment, or having insufficient time because of conflicting medical appointments. Concerns about use of personal data or tissue and blood samples for genetic research and lack of direct benefit were reported as significant challenges to recruitment.Conclusion: When setting recruitment targets for patients undergoing investigations or awaiting treatment for cancer (new cases), it is important to consider lower response rates because of various patient, logistical, and trial-specific challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Recruitment methods heavily impact budget and outcomes in clinical trials. We conducted a post-hoc examination of the efficiency and cost of three different recruitment methods used in Journey for Control of Diabetes: the IDEA Study, a randomized controlled trial evaluating outcomes of group and individual diabetes education in New Mexico and Minnesota. Electronic databases were used to identify health plan members with diabetes and then one of the following three methods was used to recruit study participants: [1.] Minnesota Method 1 — Mail only (first half of recruitment period). Mailed invitations with return-response forms. [2.] Minnesota Method 2 — Mail and selective phone calls (second half of recruitment period). Mailed invitations with return-response forms and subsequent phone calls to non-responders. [3.] New Mexico Method 3 — Mail and non-selective phone calls (full recruitment period): Mailed invitations with subsequent phone calls to all. The combined methods succeeded in meeting the recruitment goal of 623 subjects. There were 147 subjects recruited using Minnesota''s Method 1, 190 using Minnesota''s Method 2, and 286 using New Mexico''s Method 3. Efficiency rates (percentage of invited patients who enrolled) were 4.2% for Method 1, 8.4% for Method 2, and 7.9% for Method 3. Calculated costs per enrolled subject were $71.58 (Method 1), $85.47 (Method 2), and $92.09 (Method 3). A mail-only method to assess study interest was relatively inexpensive but not efficient enough to sustain recruitment targets. Phone call follow-up after mailed invitations added to recruitment efficiency. Use of return-response forms with selective phone follow-up to non-responders was cost effective. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]