Dataset Information

Outreach to diversify clinical trial participation: A randomized recruitment study.

ABSTRACT: Racial and ethnic minorities remain underrepresented in clinical research, yet few recruitment strategies have been rigorously evaluated.We experimentally tested whether targeted recruitment letters acknowledging diabetes health disparities and health risks specific to recipients' racial/ethnic group improved two metrics of trial participation: willingness to be screened and enrollment. This experiment was efficiently nested within a randomized clinical trial examining a preventive lifestyle intervention among women at high risk for diabetes. Pregnant women with gestational diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance (N?=?445) were randomized to receive a targeted recruitment letter with health risk information specific to their racial/ethnic group (n?=?216), or a standard letter with risk information for the general population (n?=?229). All letters were bilingual in English and Spanish.The targeted as compared to the standard letter did not improve screening or enrollment rates overall or within separate racial/ethnic groups. Among Latina women who preferred Spanish, the targeted letter showed trends for improved screening (66.7% vs 33.3%, p?=?.06) and enrollment rates (38.9% vs 13.3%, p?=?.13). In contrast, among Latina women who preferred English, the targeted letter significantly lowered screening (29.6% vs 57.1%, p?=?.04) and showed trends for lowered enrollment rates (25.9% vs 50.0%, p?=?.07).Results from this randomized study appear to suggest that recruitment letters with diabetes health risk information targeted to recipients' race/ethnicity may improve one metric of clinical trial participation among Latina women who prefer Spanish, but not English. Larger experimental studies, incorporating input from diverse participant stakeholders, are needed to develop evidence-based minority recruitment strategies.

SUBMITTER: Brown SD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4424096 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Outreach to diversify clinical trial participation: A randomized recruitment study.

Brown Susan D SD Partee Paula N PN Feng Juanran J Quesenberry Charles P CP Hedderson Monique M MM Ehrlich Samantha F SF Kiernan Michaela M Ferrara Assiamira A

Clinical trials (London, England) 20150202 3

<h4>Background/aims</h4>Racial and ethnic minorities remain underrepresented in clinical research, yet few recruitment strategies have been rigorously evaluated.<h4>Methods</h4>We experimentally tested whether targeted recruitment letters acknowledging diabetes health disparities and health risks specific to recipients' racial/ethnic group improved two metrics of trial participation: willingness to be screened and enrollment. This experiment was efficiently nested within a randomized clinical tr ...[more]

PMID: 25644997

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Mailed fecal immunochemical test (FIT) outreach is more effective than colonoscopy outreach for increasing 1-time colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but long-term effectiveness may need repeat testing and timely follow-up for abnormal results. Objective:Compare the effectiveness of FIT outreach and colonoscopy outreach to increase completion of the CRC screening process (screening initiation and follow-up) within 3 years. Design, Setting, and Participants:Pragmatic randomized clinical trial from March 2013 to July 2016 among 5999 participants aged 50 to 64 years who were receiving primary care in Parkland Health and Hospital System and were not up to date with CRC screenings. Interventions:Random assignment to mailed FIT outreach (n?=?2400), mailed colonoscopy outreach (n?=?2400), or usual care with clinic-based screening (n?=?1199). Outreach included processes to promote repeat annual testing for individuals in the FIT outreach group with normal results and completion of diagnostic and screening colonoscopy for those with an abnormal FIT result or assigned to colonoscopy outreach. Main Outcomes and Measures:Primary outcome was screening process completion, defined as adherence to colonoscopy completion, annual testing for a normal FIT result, diagnostic colonoscopy for an abnormal FIT result, or treatment evaluation if CRC was detected. Secondary outcomes included detection of any adenoma or advanced neoplasia (including CRC) and screening-related harms (including bleeding or perforation). Results:All 5999 participants (median age, 56 years; women, 61.9%) were included in the intention-to-screen analyses. Screening process completion was 38.4% in the colonoscopy outreach group, 28.0% in the FIT outreach group, and 10.7% in the usual care group. Compared with the usual care group, between-group differences for completion were higher for both outreach groups (27.7% [95% CI, 25.1% to 30.4%] for the colonoscopy outreach group; 17.3% [95% CI, 14.8% to 19.8%] for FIT outreach group), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (10.4% [95% CI, 7.8% to 13.1%] for the colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group; P?<?.001 for all comparisons). Compared with usual care, the between-group differences in adenoma and advanced neoplasia detection rates were higher for both outreach groups (colonoscopy outreach group: 10.3% [95% CI, 9.5% to 12.1%] for adenoma and 3.1% [95% CI, 2.0% to 4.1%] for advanced neoplasia, P?<?.001 for both comparisons; FIT outreach group: 1.3% [95% CI, -0.1% to 2.8%] for adenoma and 0.7% [95% CI, -0.2% to 1.6%] for advanced neoplasia, P?<?.08 and P?<?.13, respectively), and highest in the colonoscopy outreach group (colonoscopy outreach group vs FIT outreach group: 9.0% [95% CI, 7.3% to 10.7%] for adenoma and 2.4% [95% CI, 1.3% to 3.3%] for advanced neoplasia, P?<?.001 for both comparisons). There were no screening-related harms in any groups. Conclusions and Relevance:Among persons aged 50 to 64 years receiving primary care at a safety-net institution, mailed outreach invitations offering FIT or colonoscopy compared with usual care increased the proportion completing CRC screening process within 3 years. The rate of screening process completion was higher with colonoscopy than FIT outreach. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01710215.

Project description:Widening socioeconomic disparities in mortality in the United States are largely explained by slower declines in tobacco use among smokers of low socioeconomic status (SES) than among those of higher SES, which points to the need for targeted tobacco cessation interventions. Documentation of smoking status in electronic health records (EHRs) provides the tools for health systems to proactively offer tobacco treatment to socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers.To evaluate a proactive tobacco cessation strategy that addresses sociocontextual mediators of tobacco use for low-SES smokers.This prospective, randomized clinical trial included low-SES adult smokers who described their race and/or ethnicity as black, Hispanic, or white and received primary care at 1 of 13 practices in the greater Boston area (intervention group, n?=?399; control group, n?=?308).We analyzed EHRs to identify potentially eligible participants and then used interactive voice response (IVR) techniques to reach out to them. Consenting patients were randomized to either receive usual care from their own health care team or enter an intervention program that included (1) telephone-based motivational counseling, (2) free nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for 6 weeks, (3) access to community-based referrals to address sociocontextual mediators of tobacco use, and (4) integration of all these components into their normal health care through the EHR system.Self-reported past-7-day tobacco abstinence 9 months after randomization ("quitting"), assessed by automated caller or blinded study staff.The intervention group had a higher quit rate than the usual care group (17.8% vs 8.1%; odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.5-4.0; number needed to treat, 10). We examined whether use of intervention components was associated with quitting among individuals in the intervention group: individuals who participated in the telephone counseling were more likely to quit than those who did not (21.2% vs 10.4%; P?<?.001). There was no difference in quitting by use of NRT. Quitting did not differ by a request for a community referral, but individuals who used their referral were more likely to quit than those who did not (43.6% vs 15.3%; P?<?.001).Proactive, IVR-facilitated outreach enables engagement with low-SES smokers. Providing counseling, NRT, and access to community-based resources to address sociocontextual mediators among smokers reached in this setting is effective.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01156610.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate whether opt out framing, messaging incorporating behavioral science concepts, or electronic communication increases the uptake of hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening in patients born between 1945 and 1965.DesignPragmatic randomized controlled trial.Setting43 primary care practices from one academic health system (Philadelphia, PA, USA) between April 2019 and May 2020.ParticipantsPatients born between 1945 and 1965 with no history of screening and at least two primary care visits in the two years before the enrollment period.InterventionsThis multilevel trial was divided into two studies. Substudy A included 1656 eligible patients of 17 primary care clinicians who were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a mailed letter about HCV screening (letter only), or a similar letter with a laboratory order for HCV screening (letter+order). Substudy B included the remaining 19 837 eligible patients followed by 417 clinicians. Active electronic patient portal users were randomized 1:5 to receive a mailed letter about HCV screening (letter), or an electronic patient portal message with similar content (patient portal); inactive patient portal users were mailed a letter. In a factorial design, patients in substudy B were also randomized 1:1 to receive standard content (usual care), or content based on principles of social norming, anticipated regret, reciprocity, and commitment (behavioral content).Main outcome measuresProportion of patients who completed HCV testing within four months.Results21 303 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Among the 1642 patients in substudy A, 19.2% (95% confidence interval 16.5% to 21.9%) completed screening in the letter only arm and 43.1% (39.7% to 46.4%) in the letter+order arm (P<0.001). Among the 19 661 patients in substudy B, 14.6% (13.9% to 15.3%) completed screening with usual care content and 13.6% (13.0% to 14.3%) with behavioral science content (P=0.06). Among active patient portal users, 17.8% (16.0% to 19.5%) completed screening after receiving a letter and 13.8% (13.1% to 14.5%) after receiving a patient portal message (P<0.001).ConclusionsOpt out framing and effort reduction by including a signed laboratory order with outreach increased screening for HCV. Behavioral science messaging content did not increase uptake, and mailed letters achieved a greater response rate than patient portal messages.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03712553.

Project description:ImportanceColonoscopy and fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) are considered top-tier tests for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Behavioral economic insights about "choice architecture" suggest that participation could be influenced by how people are presented test options.ObjectiveTo investigate response rates for offering colonoscopy only compared with sequential choice (colonoscopy and then FIT) or active choice (colonoscopy or FIT) through mailed outreach.Design, setting, and participantsThree-arm pragmatic randomized clinical trial conducted between November 14, 2017, and May 14, 2018. The setting was primary care practices at an academic health system. Patients aged 50 to 74 years with at least 2 primary care visits in the 2-year preenrollment period were included if they were eligible but not up to date on CRC screening.InterventionsEligible patients received mailed outreach about CRC screening. Equal numbers of eligible patients were randomly assigned to 3 outreach groups to receive mailings about CRC screening with the following options: (1) direct phone number to call for scheduling colonoscopy (colonoscopy only), (2) direct phone number to call for colonoscopy and a mailed FIT kit if no response within 4 weeks (sequential choice), or (3) direct phone number to call for colonoscopy and a mailed FIT kit offered at the same time (active choice).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was CRC screening completion (FIT or colonoscopy) within 4 months of initial outreach. The secondary outcomes were CRC screening completion within 6 months of outreach and the choice of colonoscopy as a screening test.ResultsIn total, 438 patients were included in the intent-to-treat analysis, with a median age of 56 years (interquartile range, 52-63 years); 55.0% were women. At 4 months, the CRC screening completion rates were 14.4% (95% CI, 8.7%-20.1%) in the colonoscopy-only arm, 17.1% (95% CI, 11.0%-23.2%) in the sequential choice arm, and 19.9% (95% CI, 13.4%-26.4%) in the active choice arm. Neither choice arm achieved a screening rate statistically greater than that in the colonoscopy-alone arm. Among those who completed CRC screening at 4 months, 90.5% (95% CI, 78.0%-103.0%) chose colonoscopy in the colonoscopy-only arm, which was significantly higher than the 52.0% (95% CI, 32.4%-71.6%; P = .005) and 37.9% (95% CI, 20.2%-55.6%; P < .001) in the sequential choice and active choice arms, respectively.Conclusions and relevanceThere was no significant increase in CRC screening when offering sequential or active choice, but there was a lower rate of colonoscopy in the choice arms than in the colonoscopy-only arm. Subtle changes in sequencing or defaults can alter patient decision making related to preventive health.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03246438.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Pragmatic randomized clinical trials are essential to determine the effectiveness of interventions in "real-world" clinical practice. These trials frequently use a cluster-randomized methodology, with randomization at the site level. Despite policymakers' increased interest in supporting pragmatic randomized clinical trials, no studies to date have reported on the unique recruitment challenges faced by cluster-randomized pragmatic trials. We investigated key challenges and successful strategies for hospital recruitment in the Comprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services (COMPASS) study. METHODS:The COMPASS study is designed to compare the effectiveness of the COMPASS model versus usual care in improving functional outcomes, reducing the numbers of hospital readmissions, and reducing caregiver strain for patients discharged home after stroke or transient ischemic attack. This model integrates early supported discharge planning with transitional care management, including nurse-led follow-up phone calls after 2, 30, and 60 days and an in-person clinic visit at 7-14 days involving a functional assessment and neurological examination. We present descriptive statistics of the characteristics of successfully recruited hospitals compared with all eligible hospitals, reasons for non-participation, and effective recruitment strategies. RESULTS:We successfully recruited 41 (43%) of 95 eligible North Carolina hospitals. Leading, non-exclusive reasons for non-participation included: insufficient staff or financial resources (n?=?33, 61%), lack of health system support (n?=?16, 30%), and lack of support of individual decision-makers (n?=?11, 20%). Successful recruitment strategies included: building and nurturing relationships, engaging team members and community partners with a diverse skill mix, identifying gatekeepers, finding mutually beneficial solutions, having a central institutional review board, sharing published pilot data, and integrating contracts and review board administrators. CONCLUSIONS:Although we incorporated strategies based on the best available evidence at the outset of the study, hospital recruitment required three times as much time and considerably more staff than anticipated. To reach our goal, we tailored strategies to individuals, hospitals, and health systems. Successful recruitment of a sufficient number and representative mix of hospitals requires considerable preparation, planning, and flexibility. Strategies presented here may assist future trial organizers in implementing cluster-randomized pragmatic trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02588664 . Registered on 23 October 2015.

Project description:Persons with a mental health diagnosis have high rates of tobacco use and face numerous barriers to cessation including high levels of nicotine dependence, low rates of tobacco treatment referrals from mental health providers, and limited availability of tobacco treatment targeted to their needs. This manuscript describes the rationale and methods of a clinical trial with the following aims: 1) Compare the reach and efficacy of a proactive telephone-based tobacco cessation program for Veterans Health Administration (VHA) mental health clinic patients to VHA usual care and 2) Model longitudinal associations between baseline patient characteristics and long-term abstinence.We will use the electronic medical record to identify patients across four VHA healthcare facilities who have a clinical reminder code indicating current tobacco use in the past six months and who have had a mental health clinic visit in the past 12 months. We will send each patient an introductory letter and baseline survey. Survey respondents (N = 3840) will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to intervention or control. Control participants will receive VHA usual care. Intervention participants will receive proactive motivational telephone outreach to offer tobacco treatment. Intervention participants interested in treatment will receive eight weeks of nicotine replacement therapy plus eight sessions of specialized telephone counseling over two months, followed by monthly maintenance counseling for four months. We will conduct telephone surveys with participants at six and 12 months to assess study outcomes. We will collect a mailed saliva sample from patients reporting 7-day abstinence on the telephone surveys. The primary outcome will be cotinine-validated abstinence at 12-month follow-up.Mental health patients are a high-risk smoking population with significant barriers to cessation. This study will evaluate the efficacy of a program that proactively reaches out to smokers with a mental health treatment history to engage them into telephone cessation counseling targeted to the needs of mental health patients.Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01737281 (registered November 5, 2012).

Dataset Information

Outreach to diversify clinical trial participation: A randomized recruitment study.

Publications

Outreach to diversify clinical trial participation: A randomized recruitment study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure