Pål Nystuen1, Kåre B Hagen. 1. Norwegian Directorate for Health and Social Welfare, Department of Social Services Research, PO Box 8054 dep., Oslo N-0031, Norway. pny@shdir.no
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Studies investigating means of recruiting participants to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are sparse. We investigated the effects of telephone reminders as a recruitment strategy. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Sick-listed employees received a written invitation to participate in a study comparing standard treatments with a solution-focused follow-up and were randomly allocated to an intervention or control group (n=703). Those who did not respond within 2 weeks received either 'no reminder' (n=242) or 'attempted telephone reminder' (n=256). Outcome was enrollment to the RCT. RESULTS: An intention to recruit analysis revealed no significant differences between the groups (P=.229). An intention to phone analysis among nonresponders revealed significant differences between 'no reminder' (recruited 4.5%) and 'attempted telephone reminder' (recruited 12.1%) (P=.003, odds ratio 2.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42-5.90). An analysis of numbers needed to phone showed that to recruit one more person in this group of nonresponders, we needed to phone 13 persons (95% CI=8-33). CONCLUSION: Systematic use of telephone calls can increase the recruitment rate among nonresponders in RCTs.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: Studies investigating means of recruiting participants to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are sparse. We investigated the effects of telephone reminders as a recruitment strategy. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Sick-listed employees received a written invitation to participate in a study comparing standard treatments with a solution-focused follow-up and were randomly allocated to an intervention or control group (n=703). Those who did not respond within 2 weeks received either 'no reminder' (n=242) or 'attempted telephone reminder' (n=256). Outcome was enrollment to the RCT. RESULTS: An intention to recruit analysis revealed no significant differences between the groups (P=.229). An intention to phone analysis among nonresponders revealed significant differences between 'no reminder' (recruited 4.5%) and 'attempted telephone reminder' (recruited 12.1%) (P=.003, odds ratio 2.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42-5.90). An analysis of numbers needed to phone showed that to recruit one more person in this group of nonresponders, we needed to phone 13 persons (95% CI=8-33). CONCLUSION: Systematic use of telephone calls can increase the recruitment rate among nonresponders in RCTs.
Authors: Kuan-Fu Chen; Elizabeth Colantuoni; Faisal Siddiqi; Victor D Dinglas; Kristin A Sepulveda; Eddy Fan; Peter J Pronovost; Dale M Needham Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-12-15 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Shaun Treweek; Pauline Lockhart; Marie Pitkethly; Jonathan A Cook; Monica Kjeldstrøm; Marit Johansen; Taina K Taskila; Frank M Sullivan; Sue Wilson; Catherine Jackson; Ritu Jones; Elizabeth D Mitchell Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 2.692