Multiple barriers contribute to the slow recruitment of participants to research studies, which in turn extends the time required to translate promising scientific discoveries into proven therapeutic interventions. A small but growing literature is developing on the extraordinary costs of recruiting participants to studies, and thereby demonstrating that underestimating the cost of participant recruitment can contribute to these recruitment problems. These recruitment challenges and costs are exacerbated when the participants' study eligibility is determined by relatively narrowly defined illness parameters. Recruitment challenges are further compounded when dyads (two individuals engaged in a sociologically significant relationship, such as husbands and wives, siblings or extended families) must be recruited to an illness-focused study. For these latter groups, there are no data to guide researchers in how to anticipate those participant recruitment costs. This paper describes the staff costs for a variety of strategies used to recruit participants to a randomized supportive care study for couples who were within 18 months of a prostate cancer diagnosis. Pegged to the value of the U.S. dollar for the period, the average cost of staff time was $288 per recruited and enrolled dyad, plus a promised additional $100 incentive for study retention. Within the strategies used, the staff costs per recruited dyad ranged from $ 152 to $1,688. Accrual Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. per strategy ranged from zero to 107 enrolled couples. When asked for secondary sources of information about the study, many participants reported more than one source of study referral, reflective of the multifaceted recruitment strategies deployed. In spite of innovative, culturally competent, and broad based recruitment methods, attainment of a diverse sample was difficult to accomplish in this study. Having estimates of the actual cost of recruiting dyads to research studies can help investigators prepare realistic study budgets. NIH Public Access

Objectives: This study was conducted with the purpose of search evidence in terms of the efficacy and safety that to demonstrated advantages of any of the renal replacement therapy in terms of peritoneal dialysis (PD), hemodialysis (HD) and kidney transplant (KT) , used in patients with chronic kidney failure. Methods: The systematic review was performed BY Cochrane Methodology in PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, and LILAC's. Only observational studies were included in adult patients with chronical kidney failure and that were under one of the renal replacements treatments were included. STROBE tool was used to evaluate the quality of these studies. Results: Of the 4,472 studies, only 8 observational studies fulfil the inclusion criteria. From these only 6 studies compared peritoneal dialysis vs haemodialysis, from which , it was proven that patients with PD show better comorbidities in comparison with those who are under treatment with haemodialysis (diabetes, cardiovascular and cardiac diseases One additionally study evaluates the quality of life in all substitution therapies , where it was reported that patients who received KT showed a bigger satisfaction with the therapy (4.85) in comparison with PD (3.59) and HD (4.59). On the other hand, the las study evaluates the survival during 18 months between those three treatments, being better in KT (96.960.031) vs DP (9460.024) vs HD (8360.093). Population consist of: 66,190 patients that were distributed in PD 21,163, HD 44,904 and KT 123. Evaluated in average of 61 months for HD and 50 months for PD. Conclusions: While evaluating only observational studies, these demonstrate that KT could be the election therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease, However, more evidence is necessary and with higher quality level in order to sustain the research.

Objectives: This study was conducted with the purpose of search evidence in terms of the efficacy and safety that to demonstrated advantages of any of the renal replacement therapy in terms of peritoneal dialysis (PD), hemodialysis (HD) and kidney transplant (KT) , used in patients with chronic kidney failure. Methods: The systematic review was performed BY Cochrane Methodology in PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library, and LILAC's. Only observational studies were included in adult patients with chronical kidney failure and that were under one of the renal replacements treatments were included. STROBE tool was used to evaluate the quality of these studies. Results: Of the 4,472 studies, only 8 observational studies fulfil the inclusion criteria. From these only 6 studies compared peritoneal dialysis vs haemodialysis, from which , it was proven that patients with PD show better comorbidities in comparison with those who are under treatment with haemodialysis (diabetes, cardiovascular and cardiac diseases One additionally study evaluates the quality of life in all substitution therapies , where it was reported that patients who received KT showed a bigger satisfaction with the therapy (4.85) in comparison with PD (3.59) and HD (4.59). On the other hand, the las study evaluates the survival during 18 months between those three treatments, being better in KT (96.960.031) vs DP (9460.024) vs HD (8360.093). Population consist of: 66,190 patients that were distributed in PD 21,163, HD 44,904 and KT 123. Evaluated in average of 61 months for HD and 50 months for PD. Conclusions: While evaluating only observational studies, these demonstrate that KT could be the election therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease, However, more evidence is necessary and with higher quality level in order to sustain the research.