↓ Skip to main content

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

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
19 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Systematic techniques for assisting recruitment to trials (START): study protocol for embedded, randomized controlled trials
Published in
Trials, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-15-407
Pubmed ID
Authors

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

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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 20%
Researcher 18 20%
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 22 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 23%
Psychology 11 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 27 30%