Barriers and facilitators to the participation of subjects in clinical trials: An overview of reviews

Abstract

Background The demand for clinical trial participants is today one of the highest it has ever been and continues to increase. At the same time, subject recruitment continues to be problematic and the major reason for clinical trial premature terminations. The literature on clinical trial recruitment, which spans several decades and includes hundreds of studies, has an abundance of findings that can be synthesized by way of an overview to provide a well-informed and complete picture of the factors that determine subject participation. Objectives An overview of the systematic reviews that report barriers and facilitators to clinical trial participation was conducted. The extracted data were synthesized, and a thematic framework of the factors that affect subject participation in clinical trials was developed. The overview extended across medical subjects and demographics. Methods Thirty reviews that complied with the inclusion criteria were included. These reviews covered 753 relevant primary studies and reported 881 barriers and facilitators. The barriers and facilitators were thematically synthesized and a thematic framework of 20 themes was developed. The quality of the included reviews was assessed and reported. Main results Several opportunities to increase clinical trial participation, by developing interventions and changing the trial design, derived from an analysis of the thematic framework. That analysis also showed that most of the 20 themes operate mainly as a barrier or as a facilitator, and that most have an effect across medical subjects. As to the quality elements assessed, some reviews complied almost fully but most only partially.

Generalizability and reach of a randomized controlled trial to improve oral health among home care recipients: comparing participants and nonparticipants at baseline and during follow-up

“…Ideally, RCTs have both a high response and representative study population. Barriers and facilitators to trial participation have been described [40][41][42][43][44], and a variety of tools and strategies have been proposed to improve the recruitment to RCTs [45][46][47][48][49]. Furthermore, it could be worthwhile to conduct a pilot trial to estimate the response expectable in the main trial and identify the potential for improvement [50].…”

The efficacy of family treatments for adolescent anorexia nervosa in specialist versus non-specialist settings: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…However, individuals with AN and their families typically seek treatment from local community settings, often disconnected from specialist multi-disciplinary teams. Further, many young people presenting to these non-specialist services also experience significant comorbidities, such as suicidal ideation, self-harm or psychotic symptoms, that may have meant they were excluded from clinical trials [ 29 ]. Thus, it is worthwhile to determine the efficacy of FT for this ‘real-world’ population group.…”

Intentional and actional components of engaged participation in public health research studies: qualitative synthesis of a recruitment and retention process into the theory-informed INTACT-RS framework

“…This provides exemplary information about motivational and actional processes, which are decisive for committed participation in research studies from the perspective of the study participants. While parents and HCPs may not be perceived as "hard to reach" groups per se, we expected recruitment to be challenging [9,23,26]. As it is the (potential) study participants who decide whether to participate, we aimed to understand this process in more detail by developing and applying INTACT-RS.…”