Does a video clip enhance recruitment into a parenting trial? Learnings from a study within a trial.
Patient information
Recruitment
Research methodology
Video clip
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Oct 2020
15 Oct 2020
Historique:
received:
14
05
2020
accepted:
29
09
2020
entrez:
16
10
2020
pubmed:
17
10
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Reaching recruitment targets in randomised controlled trials is a challenge. Media tools are increasingly used to engage participants, yet there is a paucity of research into the use of video to optimise recruitment. We therefore tested whether adding a participant information video clip to a standard participant information sheet improved recruitment into a parenting trial. One hundred seven participants were randomised to receive either a participant information sheet (n = 51) or an informational video clip (n = 56) as part of an email contact following a screening phase. All participants went on to receive the information sheet as part of the existing consent procedure. The video condition did not increase the odds of recruitment into the trial, such that those in the video condition were significantly less likely to participate in the main trial (OR = 0.253, CI = 0.104-0.618, p = 0.003). The introduction of a video clip into the recruitment stages of a parenting trial did not lead to an improvement in recruitment; however, the small sample size precludes definitive inferences. We offer reflections on challenges encountered in implementing the SWAT and suggestions for other researchers seeking to embed recruitment SWATs into similar trials. Current controlled trials ISRCTN 58327365 . Registered on 19 March 2015. SWAT 106; Effects of a video clip on recruitment into a randomised trial. Registered on 20 December 2016.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Reaching recruitment targets in randomised controlled trials is a challenge. Media tools are increasingly used to engage participants, yet there is a paucity of research into the use of video to optimise recruitment. We therefore tested whether adding a participant information video clip to a standard participant information sheet improved recruitment into a parenting trial.
METHODS
METHODS
One hundred seven participants were randomised to receive either a participant information sheet (n = 51) or an informational video clip (n = 56) as part of an email contact following a screening phase. All participants went on to receive the information sheet as part of the existing consent procedure.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The video condition did not increase the odds of recruitment into the trial, such that those in the video condition were significantly less likely to participate in the main trial (OR = 0.253, CI = 0.104-0.618, p = 0.003).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The introduction of a video clip into the recruitment stages of a parenting trial did not lead to an improvement in recruitment; however, the small sample size precludes definitive inferences. We offer reflections on challenges encountered in implementing the SWAT and suggestions for other researchers seeking to embed recruitment SWATs into similar trials.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Current controlled trials ISRCTN 58327365 . Registered on 19 March 2015.
SWAT REGISTRATION
UNASSIGNED
SWAT 106; Effects of a video clip on recruitment into a randomised trial. Registered on 20 December 2016.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33059763
doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04779-0
pii: 10.1186/s13063-020-04779-0
pmc: PMC7558733
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
856Subventions
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : 13/04/33
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Health Technology Assessment Programme
ID : 13/04/33
Références
Am J Epidemiol. 1996 Oct 1;144(7):704-6
pubmed: 8823067
Trials. 2014 Jan 23;15:32
pubmed: 24456928
Clin Trials. 2018 Dec;15(6):533-542
pubmed: 30165760
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2009 Apr;48(4):400-403
pubmed: 19242383
Trials. 2017 Jun 8;18(1):265
pubmed: 28595613
Control Clin Trials. 1998 Feb;19(1):25-38
pubmed: 9492967
Trials. 2015 Jun 05;16:261
pubmed: 26044814
Ann Epidemiol. 2000 Jan;10(1):59-67
pubmed: 10658689
Trials. 2018 Sep 18;19(1):503
pubmed: 30227890
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):MR000013
pubmed: 17443634
J Evid Based Med. 2013 Aug;6(3):136-7
pubmed: 24325369
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;(2):MR000012
pubmed: 17443633
Trials. 2006 Dec 12;7:32
pubmed: 17163988
J Clin Transl Sci. 2017 Dec;1(6):366-372
pubmed: 29707259
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 20;7(3):e015276
pubmed: 28320800
Trials. 2019 Jul 24;20(1):453
pubmed: 31340853
Contemp Clin Trials. 2006 Oct;27(5):441-8
pubmed: 16798101
Trials. 2018 Feb 23;19(1):139
pubmed: 29475444
Trials. 2017 Nov 15;18(1):543
pubmed: 29141661
Heart Fail Rev. 2014 Mar;19(2):135-52
pubmed: 23099992
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Feb 10;34(5):469-78
pubmed: 26700123
Fam Pract. 2003 Feb;20(1):83-92
pubmed: 12509377
J Child Health Care. 2019 Sep;23(3):468-482
pubmed: 30384772
Patient Educ Couns. 2004 May;53(2):205-16
pubmed: 15140461
J Urol. 2007 Oct;178(4 Pt 1):1429-33
pubmed: 17706710
Trials. 2019 Feb 19;20(1):141
pubmed: 30782209
Trials. 2018 Mar 1;19(1):147
pubmed: 29490702
Support Care Cancer. 2006 Apr;14(4):303-9
pubmed: 16633840
Control Clin Trials. 1997 Aug;18(4):328-52
pubmed: 9257072
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 22;2:MR000013
pubmed: 29468635
Health Technol Assess. 2015 Feb;19(11):1-138
pubmed: 25671821
Contemp Clin Trials. 2018 Mar;66:74-79
pubmed: 29330082