Skip to main content
. 2023 Jun 16;2023:281–290.

Table 3.

Perceptions About the Influence of Site Status and Funding Source on Participant Recruitment (N = 16)

Survey Response n (%) Explanation (optional response)
Site Status Impact (Single- vs. Multi-site)
Neither Situation is Better than the Other 10 (63)

  • We have a large patient population that is very willing to participate in studies.

  • There are many factors-number of sites is only one.

  • It depends on the eligibility.

  • The patients seek access to new agents regardless of other site involvement.

  • Both types require special expedients, but when done right, both work well.

  • Some participants find it appealing to be part of a multi-center trial, and others are more likely to consent to a small study.

  • In my experience, it hasnt mattered.

  • Have not noticed a difference—either way, recruitment here is up to us.
Easier Recruitment in Multi-Center Studies 4 (25)

  • More patients to screen.

  • Better awareness.

  • The number of participants needed to be enrolled is less.

  • Better advertisement about the study.
Easier Recruitment in Single-Center Studies 2 (12)

  • It is easier when the PI is recruiting and less easy when it involves the use of research coordinators.

  • Because when single site, we can optimize the protocol for local enrollment.
Funding Source Impact
Definitely Yes 1 (6)

  • Marketing and reputation.
Probably Yes 6 (38)

  • Funding source influences per patient site reimbursement.

  • Incentives may be greater for industrial studies—can motivate recruiting staff.

  • More money to budget towards advertisement.

  • Advertisements, handouts.

  • If an investigator-initiated study, we will write a better protocol.

  • Funding can often support additional research staff.
Might or Might Not 3 (19)

  • Competitive enrollment in either would stimulate me to rapidly recruit.

  • Some patients feel better if NIH funds study because they do not trust PHARMA. Others dont trust government - it depends.
Probably No 5 (31)

  • I do not think patients care.

  • Participants are not aware of funding source at outset/

  • The distinction is usually always well understood by patients.

  • Again, other factors are more important.

  • Patients or volunteers are most interested in the science, not the sponsor.
Definitely No 1 (6)

  • It depends on eligibility.