Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 8, 2026
Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Recruitment and participation of general practices in research networks: quantitative evaluation of the first joint
Michael Pentzek1,2, Susanne Löscher3,2, Karen Voigt4,5,6
1Institute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Primary Care Research Group, Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr 55, 45147 Essen, Germany michael.pentzek@uk-essen.de.
Background:
Recruiting general practices for research is challenging. Practice-based research networks (PBRNs) may improve participation, but little is known about how newly established PBRNs function operationally in multicentre studies.
Aim:
To evaluate recruitment effort, participation, data completeness, and acceptability in the first joint study of six German PBRNs.
Design And Setting:
Multicentre cross-sectional feasibility study across 18 university sites in six German PBRNs.
Method:
GPs completed an online REDCap survey covering practice characteristics, aggregated patient numbers manually extracted from practice management systems (PMS), and attitudes towards post-COVID/post-vaccination-related symptoms. Sites documented contacts, reminders, and time investment. A two-step cluster analysis characterised site-level recruitment strategies, and a generalised linear mixed model examined predictors of data completeness.
Results:
Of 906 contacted GPs, 156 participated (17.2%); 69 (7.6%) provided near-complete datasets (≥90% item response). Recruitment required 134 staff-hours overall, equivalent to about 2 hours and 13 contacted GPs per near-complete dataset, and varied substantially between sites. Two recruitment clusters emerged: an email-oriented, low-effort strategy that recruited more practices overall, and a phone-intensive, high-effort strategy that achieved higher response rates but lower acceptability. Data completeness was lowest for PMS-derived patient data. Completeness varied by site, but not by PBRN or recruitment cluster, and was higher among younger and female GPs, in multi-doctor practices, and among those with prior research experience.
Conclusion:
In this first joint German PBRN project, participation and data completeness were limited despite network affiliation. Site-level capability, practice research experience, and easier extraction of routine data appear crucial for future PBRN studies.
