Table 2.
Factors Contributing to Successful Clinical Study Recruitment, Results of a 2010 CTSA Consortium-Wide Survey (N = 46 Respondents From 44 CTSAs)
| Factors affecting recruitment success | No. (%) of respondents selecting the factor as most importanta |
|---|---|
| Quality of recruitment plan overall | 24 (52) |
| Feasibility of recruitment assessment performed before starting recruitment | 18 (39) |
| The nature of the studies (e.g., trials offering novel treatments) | 15 (33) |
| Relationship established with coordinator | 13 (28) |
| Relationship established with investigator | 10 (22) |
| Financial compensation for participants | 10 (22) |
| Recruitment of prior volunteers through coordinators | 9 (20) |
| Adequate budget | 9 (20) |
| Referral of participants by their personal physicians | 8 (17) |
| Nature/quality of first interaction (telephone pre-screen, scheduling, etc.) | 5 (11) |
| Recruitment of willing volunteers from a participant registry | 5 (11) |
| Through referral/collaboration with private practitioners | 4 (9) |
| Quality of informed consent discussion with investigator | 2 (4) |
| Quality of informed consent discussion with coordinator | 1 (2) |
| Quality of advertising | 1 (2) |
| Quality of recruitment services from support center | 0 |
| Other (please specify)b | 4 (9) |
Abbreviations: CTSA indicates Clinical and Translational Science Award; CTSAs, CTSA sites.
Respondents were asked “What do you believe are the three most important elements of successful recruitment at your CTSA?,” operationally defined as timely accrual. There are currently no common standards or definitions for evaluating or aggregating this information. Respondents relied on local infrastructure, reporting, and expertise to compile responses.
The four respondents who selected this response option provided text descriptions of elements of successful recruitment plans: “having dedicated recruitment experts support the research team”; “a research-informed public”; “having access to target populations”; “the participant’s relationship with the research team.”