| A comparative analysis of recruitment methods used in a randomized trial of diabetes education interventions. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 20713181 Owner: NLM Status: In-Process |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
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 nonresponders. 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. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Sarah J Beaton; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Ann Von Worley; Omar D Fernandes; Dorothy Baumer; Ann M Hanson; Emily D Parker; Maureen E Busch; Herbert T Davis; C Victor Spain |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Date: 2010-08-14 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Contemporary clinical trials Volume: 31 ISSN: 1559-2030 ISO Abbreviation: Contemp Clin Trials Publication Date: 2010 Nov |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2010-10-18 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 101242342 Medline TA: Contemp Clin Trials Country: United States |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 549-57 Citation Subset: IM |
Copyright Information:
|
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
Affiliation:
|
LCF Research, 2309 Renard Place SE, Suite 103, Albuquerque, NM 87106, USA. sally@LCFresearch.org |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Assessing the success probability of a Phase III clinical trial based on Phase II data.
Next Document: Feasibility of a longitudinal study of women anticipating first pregnancy and assessed by multiple p...