↓ Skip to main content

The effect of optimised patient information materials on recruitment in a lung cancer screening trial: an embedded randomised recruitment trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
25 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
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
The effect of optimised patient information materials on recruitment in a lung cancer screening trial: an embedded randomised recruitment trial
Published in
Trials, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-2896-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adwoa Parker, Peter Knapp, Shaun Treweek, Vichithranie Madhurasinghe, Roberta Littleford, Stephanie Gallant, Frank Sullivan, Stuart Schembri, Jo Rick, Jonathan Graffy, David J. Collier, Sandra Eldridge, Anne Kennedy, Peter Bower

Abstract

Written participant information materials are important for ensuring that potential trial participants receive necessary information so that they can provide informed consent. However, such materials are frequently long and complex, which may negatively impact patient understanding and willingness to participate. Improving readability, ease of comprehension and presentation may assist with improved participant recruitment. The Systematic Techniques for Assisting Recruitment to Trials (MRC START) study aimed to develop and evaluate interventions to improve trial recruitment. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of an optimised participant information brochure and cover letter developed by MRC START regarding response and participant recruitment rates. We conducted a study within a trial (SWAT) embedded in the EarlyCDT Lung Cancer Scotland (ECLS) trial that aimed to assess the effectiveness of a new test in reducing the incidence of patients with late-stage lung cancer at diagnosis compared with standard care. Potential participants approached for ECLS were randomised to receive the original participant information brochure and accompanying letter (control group) or optimised versions of these materials which had undergone user testing and a process of re-writing, re-organisation and professional graphic design (intervention group). The primary outcome was the number of patients recruited to ECLS. The secondary outcome was the proportion of patients expressing an interest in participating in ECLS. In total, 2262 patients were randomised, 1136 of whom were sent the intervention materials and 1126 of whom were sent the control materials. The proportion of patients enrolled and randomised into ECLS was 180 of 1136 (15.8%) in the intervention group and 176 of 1126 (15.6%) in the control group (OR = 1.016, 95% CI, 0.660 to 1.564). The proportion of patients who positively responded to the invitation was 224 of 1136 (19.7%) in the intervention group and 205 of 1126 (18.2%) in the control group (OR = 1.103, 95% CI, 0.778 to 1.565). Optimised patient information materials made little difference to the proportion of patients positively responding to a trial invitation or to the proportion subsequently randomised to the host trial. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01925625 . Registered on 15 August 2015. Study Within A Trial, SWAT-23. Registered on 12 April 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 17%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Master 9 13%
Other 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 23 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Sports and Recreations 4 6%
Psychology 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 27 38%