Usage and perceived effectiveness of recruitment techniques among clinical trials recruiters

Effective recruitment techniques are essential for researchers to recruit and retain potential participants in studies, particularly as recruitment numbers into clinical trials have decreased. While recruitment techniques have been investigated, there is a gap in understanding the perspectives of clinical trials recruiters. This paper examines recruiters' usage and perceived effectiveness of various recruitment techniques, as well as their perspectives on related ethical issues.

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 381 clinical trials recruiters. Closed-ended items examined whether recruiters had used 31 pre-defined recruitment techniques and their perceptions of the effectiveness of each technique. For techniques perceived to be highly effective or ineffective, open-ended items examined recruiter reasoning. The multiple methods analysis integrated the closed-ended and open-ended data.

Recruitment techniques such as reassured potential participants about confidentiality (96.3%) and reassured about data sharing (95.8%) had high usage, while techniques like having the PI approach and enroll had a high average perceived effectiveness (M = 4.23, SD = 0.91). Recruiters often rated techniques as more highly effective when they had prior experience using them. They also identified concerns about professionalism, ethics, and transparency in standard practice recruitment techniques.

Our findings indicate that there is significant variation in the usage of clinical trial recruitment techniques and how different recruiters view the effectiveness of each technique. The unique perspectives of those who recruit into clinical trials can help inform future decisions regarding which recruitment techniques to utilize, along with how and when to use particular recruitment techniques in an ethical manner.