To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Effective recruitment techniques are essential for researchers to recruit and retain potential participants in studies, particularly as recruitment numbers into clinical trials have decreased. While recruitment techniques have been investigated, there is a gap in understanding the perspectives of clinical trials recruiters. This paper examines recruiters’ usage and perceived effectiveness of various recruitment techniques, as well as their perspectives on related ethical issues.
Methods:
We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 381 clinical trials recruiters. Closed-ended items examined whether recruiters had used 31 pre-defined recruitment techniques and their perceptions of the effectiveness of each technique. For techniques perceived to be highly effective or ineffective, open-ended items examined recruiter reasoning. The multiple methods analysis integrated the closed-ended and open-ended data.
Results:
Recruitment techniques such as reassured potential participants about confidentiality (96.3%) and reassured about data sharing (95.8%) had high usage, while techniques like having the PI approach and enroll had a high average perceived effectiveness (M = 4.23, SD = 0.91). Recruiters often rated techniques as more highly effective when they had prior experience using them. They also identified concerns about professionalism, ethics, and transparency in standard practice recruitment techniques.
Conclusions:
Our findings indicate that there is significant variation in the usage of clinical trial recruitment techniques and how different recruiters view the effectiveness of each technique. The unique perspectives of those who recruit into clinical trials can help inform future decisions regarding which recruitment techniques to utilize, along with how and when to use particular recruitment techniques in an ethical manner.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.