Table 1.

Recruitment and trial characteristics extracted from included stroke rehabilitation RCTs

	Item extracted	Justification
Recruitment characteristics	Number of patients screened for trial participation	Used to generate randomisation rate outcome
	Number of patients randomised into the trial	Used to generate randomisation rate, recruitment rate and dropout outcomes
	Number of patients who drop out	Used to generate dropout outcome
	Number of sites used for recruitment	Used to generate recruitment rate outcome
	Continent of recruitment	Recruitment has been shown to differ between countries [1, 2]
	Recruitment strategy	The recruitment strategies/methods adopted by trials may affect recruitment efficiency [3]
	Profession of the recruiter	The profession of the recruiter may play a role in willingness of patients to take part in trials [2, 4]. Some professions have been described as ‘gatekeeping’ during the recruitment process [5]
	Number of recruiters per site	The number of people responsible for recruitment may reduce recruitment efficiency [6–9]
Trial characteristics	Publication date	There is evidence to suggest recruitment of stroke survivors for clinical trials is becoming less efficient [10, 11]
	Type of intervention	The treatments on offer can be a motivating factor for potential participants [12, 13]
	Targeted impairment
	Control condition
	Stroke survivor residence	Recruitment from a community setting may lead to more efficient recruitment to RCTs [11]. Recruitment of acute stroke survivors within a hospital setting has been highlighted as a problematic recruitment area [10, 11]
	Stage of rehabilitation
	Funding support	There are potential issues of bias when certain funding bodies are used [14]. Trialists may be influenced by institution pressures to secure funding [15]
	Ethics approval	Trialists are concerned by the impact of research governance on the recruitment process [15, 16]