SETTING: Clinical trials can provide a high standard of patient care and contribute to scientific knowledge; however, only a fraction of the patients screened participate and receive treatment as part of a trial. OBJECTIVE: To explore reasons why patients were not enrolled in an international tuberculosis (TB) treatment trial and to compare experiences among study sites. DESIGN: An analysis of reasons why patients were not enrolled was conducted among patients screened for a TB clinical trial at 26 sites in North and South America, Africa, and Europe. RESULTS:Staff at study sites screened 1119 potential candidates for the trial: 61% (n = 686) were not enrolled due to 1) failure to meet eligibility criteria (n = 405, 59%), 2) site's decision (n = 168, 24%), or 3) candidate's choice (n = 113, 16%). Study staff recorded a total of 144 reasons for why they believed patients chose not to participate, including concerns over research (28%), conflicts with work or school (21%), and lifestyle and family issues (20%). Socio-demographic and geographic factors also influenced participation. CONCLUSION: Increased evaluation of screening outcomes and of specific interventions, such as improved education and communication about trial procedures, may increase the efficiency of screening and enrollment in clinical trials.
RCT Entities:
SETTING: Clinical trials can provide a high standard of patient care and contribute to scientific knowledge; however, only a fraction of the patients screened participate and receive treatment as part of a trial. OBJECTIVE: To explore reasons why patients were not enrolled in an international tuberculosis (TB) treatment trial and to compare experiences among study sites. DESIGN: An analysis of reasons why patients were not enrolled was conducted among patients screened for a TB clinical trial at 26 sites in North and South America, Africa, and Europe. RESULTS: Staff at study sites screened 1119 potential candidates for the trial: 61% (n = 686) were not enrolled due to 1) failure to meet eligibility criteria (n = 405, 59%), 2) site's decision (n = 168, 24%), or 3) candidate's choice (n = 113, 16%). Study staff recorded a total of 144 reasons for why they believed patients chose not to participate, including concerns over research (28%), conflicts with work or school (21%), and lifestyle and family issues (20%). Socio-demographic and geographic factors also influenced participation. CONCLUSION: Increased evaluation of screening outcomes and of specific interventions, such as improved education and communication about trial procedures, may increase the efficiency of screening and enrollment in clinical trials.
Authors: Susan E Dorman; John L Johnson; Stefan Goldberg; Grace Muzanye; Nesri Padayatchi; Lorna Bozeman; Charles M Heilig; John Bernardo; Shurjeel Choudhri; Jacques H Grosset; Elizabeth Guy; Priya Guyadeen; Maria Corazon Leus; Gina Maltas; Dick Menzies; Eric L Nuermberger; Margarita Villarino; Andrew Vernon; Richard E Chaisson Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2009-04-30 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: U Andergassen; N S Kasprowicz; P Hepp; C Schindlbeck; N Harbeck; M Kiechle; H Sommer; M W Beckmann; K Friese; W Janni; B Rack; C Scholz Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 2.915