黑素瘤监测随机对照试验的参与者招募和保留:范围综述

IF 1.4 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Deonna M. Ackermann , Karen Bracken , Jolyn K. Hersch , Monika Janda , Robin M. Turner , Katy J.L. Bell
{"title":"黑素瘤监测随机对照试验的参与者招募和保留:范围综述","authors":"Deonna M. Ackermann ,&nbsp;Karen Bracken ,&nbsp;Jolyn K. Hersch ,&nbsp;Monika Janda ,&nbsp;Robin M. Turner ,&nbsp;Katy J.L. Bell","doi":"10.1016/j.conctc.2025.101461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>This scoping review aims to collate and describe data on recruitment, retention, and strategies used to improve these, in randomised controlled trials of melanoma surveillance.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL databases from inception until October 23, 2023. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts, and full-texts, and one reviewer extracted data (convenience sample (n = 5) checked by a second). Eligibility criteria included: (i) RCT design, (ii) clinical setting, (iii) participants at increased risk of melanoma, (iv) interventions for early melanoma detection, and (v) early detection outcomes or surrogates such as improved skin self-examination. We calculated summary statistics and undertook qualitative data synthesis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 1746 records, 21 trials (reported in 28 papers) were included. Recruitment sources included dermatology clinics, general practice sites, and hospital databases or registries. Trials reported proportions of those screened who were eligible (mean 75 %, range 24–100 %), proportions of those eligible who were randomised (mean 63 %, range 24–95 %), numbers randomised per month (mean 25 participants, range 2–74), and proportion of those randomised who completed outcome measurements (mean 85 %, range 59–100 %) for self-report questionnaires at primary timepoints). Recruitment strategies included targeted participant identification and flexible consent processes. Retention strategies included setting narrow eligibility criteria, reminders, and financial incentives. Reporting on strategies was limited and there were no reports on effectiveness. Few studies reported recruiter facing initiatives or public and patient involvement.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>More consistent and detailed reporting of recruitment and retention strategies in RCTs is needed, alongside evaluations of their effectiveness.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37937,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications","volume":"44 ","pages":"Article 101461"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Participant recruitment and retention in randomised controlled trials of melanoma surveillance: A scoping review\",\"authors\":\"Deonna M. Ackermann ,&nbsp;Karen Bracken ,&nbsp;Jolyn K. Hersch ,&nbsp;Monika Janda ,&nbsp;Robin M. Turner ,&nbsp;Katy J.L. Bell\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.conctc.2025.101461\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>This scoping review aims to collate and describe data on recruitment, retention, and strategies used to improve these, in randomised controlled trials of melanoma surveillance.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL databases from inception until October 23, 2023. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts, and full-texts, and one reviewer extracted data (convenience sample (n = 5) checked by a second). Eligibility criteria included: (i) RCT design, (ii) clinical setting, (iii) participants at increased risk of melanoma, (iv) interventions for early melanoma detection, and (v) early detection outcomes or surrogates such as improved skin self-examination. We calculated summary statistics and undertook qualitative data synthesis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 1746 records, 21 trials (reported in 28 papers) were included. Recruitment sources included dermatology clinics, general practice sites, and hospital databases or registries. Trials reported proportions of those screened who were eligible (mean 75 %, range 24–100 %), proportions of those eligible who were randomised (mean 63 %, range 24–95 %), numbers randomised per month (mean 25 participants, range 2–74), and proportion of those randomised who completed outcome measurements (mean 85 %, range 59–100 %) for self-report questionnaires at primary timepoints). Recruitment strategies included targeted participant identification and flexible consent processes. Retention strategies included setting narrow eligibility criteria, reminders, and financial incentives. Reporting on strategies was limited and there were no reports on effectiveness. Few studies reported recruiter facing initiatives or public and patient involvement.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>More consistent and detailed reporting of recruitment and retention strategies in RCTs is needed, alongside evaluations of their effectiveness.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37937,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications\",\"volume\":\"44 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101461\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451865425000353\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451865425000353","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本综述旨在整理和描述黑色素瘤监测随机对照试验中招募、保留和改善策略的数据。方法检索MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、CENTRAL等数据库至2023年10月23日。两名审稿人筛选标题、摘要和全文,一名审稿人提取数据(方便样本(n = 5)由另一名审稿人检查)。入选标准包括:(i)随机对照试验设计,(ii)临床环境,(iii)黑色素瘤风险增加的参与者,(iv)早期黑色素瘤检测的干预措施,以及(v)早期检测结果或替代指标,如改善皮肤自检。我们进行了汇总统计,并进行了定性数据综合。结果共纳入1746例临床试验21例(文献28篇)。招募来源包括皮肤科诊所、全科诊所和医院数据库或登记处。试验报告了筛选者的合格比例(平均75%,范围24 - 100%),随机分组的合格比例(平均63%,范围24 - 95%),每月随机分组的人数(平均25名参与者,范围2-74),以及在主要时间点完成自我报告问卷结果测量的随机分组比例(平均85%,范围59 - 100%)。招聘策略包括有针对性的参与者识别和灵活的同意程序。保留策略包括设定狭窄的资格标准、提醒和财务激励。关于战略的报告有限,没有关于有效性的报告。很少有研究报告招聘人员面临的倡议或公众和患者的参与。除了评估其有效性外,还需要对随机对照试验中的招聘和保留策略进行更一致和详细的报告。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Participant recruitment and retention in randomised controlled trials of melanoma surveillance: A scoping review

Background

This scoping review aims to collate and describe data on recruitment, retention, and strategies used to improve these, in randomised controlled trials of melanoma surveillance.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL databases from inception until October 23, 2023. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts, and full-texts, and one reviewer extracted data (convenience sample (n = 5) checked by a second). Eligibility criteria included: (i) RCT design, (ii) clinical setting, (iii) participants at increased risk of melanoma, (iv) interventions for early melanoma detection, and (v) early detection outcomes or surrogates such as improved skin self-examination. We calculated summary statistics and undertook qualitative data synthesis.

Results

From 1746 records, 21 trials (reported in 28 papers) were included. Recruitment sources included dermatology clinics, general practice sites, and hospital databases or registries. Trials reported proportions of those screened who were eligible (mean 75 %, range 24–100 %), proportions of those eligible who were randomised (mean 63 %, range 24–95 %), numbers randomised per month (mean 25 participants, range 2–74), and proportion of those randomised who completed outcome measurements (mean 85 %, range 59–100 %) for self-report questionnaires at primary timepoints). Recruitment strategies included targeted participant identification and flexible consent processes. Retention strategies included setting narrow eligibility criteria, reminders, and financial incentives. Reporting on strategies was limited and there were no reports on effectiveness. Few studies reported recruiter facing initiatives or public and patient involvement.

Discussion

More consistent and detailed reporting of recruitment and retention strategies in RCTs is needed, alongside evaluations of their effectiveness.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
146
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is an international peer reviewed open access journal that publishes articles pertaining to all aspects of clinical trials, including, but not limited to, design, conduct, analysis, regulation and ethics. Manuscripts submitted should appeal to a readership drawn from a wide range of disciplines including medicine, life science, pharmaceutical science, biostatistics, epidemiology, computer science, management science, behavioral science, and bioethics. Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is unique in that it is outside the confines of disease specifications, and it strives to increase the transparency of medical research and reduce publication bias by publishing scientifically valid original research findings irrespective of their perceived importance, significance or impact. Both randomized and non-randomized trials are within the scope of the Journal. Some common topics include trial design rationale and methods, operational methodologies and challenges, and positive and negative trial results. In addition to original research, the Journal also welcomes other types of communications including, but are not limited to, methodology reviews, perspectives and discussions. Through timely dissemination of advances in clinical trials, the goal of Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications is to serve as a platform to enhance the communication and collaboration within the global clinical trials community that ultimately advances this field of research for the benefit of patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信