Related Experiment Videos
Monitoring recruitment effectiveness and cost in a clinical trial
W M Bjornson-Benson1, T B Stibolt, K A Manske
1Department of Physiology, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland 97201.
Controlled Clinical Trials
|April 1, 1993
Summary
Clinical trial recruitment costs are often underestimated. Media promotion proved most cost-effective, while neighborhood promotion and direct mail were least effective, highlighting the need for multi-strategy approaches with monitoring.
Area of Science:
- Clinical research operations
- Health services research
- Public health interventions
Background:
- Clinical trial recruitment costs and effectiveness are frequently underestimated.
- Increasing funding constraints necessitate precise cost estimations and methods for monitoring recruitment.
- Limited research exists on the cost-effectiveness of various clinical trial recruitment strategies.
Purpose of the Study:
- To develop and evaluate a system for monitoring recruitment response rates and costs.
- To compare the cost-effectiveness of five distinct recruitment methods in a clinical trial setting.
Main Methods:
- Ancillary study to the Lung Health Study in Portland, Oregon.
- Development of a monitoring and evaluation system to track recruitment.
- Analysis of five recruitment methods: media, neighborhood promotion, direct mail, worksite promotion, and participant referral over a 6-month period.
Main Results:
- Media recruitment was the most cost-effective strategy.
- Neighborhood promotion and direct mail were the least cost-effective methods.
- Worksite promotion and participant referrals demonstrated moderate cost-effectiveness.
Conclusions:
- Utilizing multiple, overlapping recruitment strategies is crucial for maximizing clinical trial recruitment effectiveness.
- Implementing a monitoring system that provides rapid feedback on strategy effectiveness and costs is essential.
- Media promotion's high cost-effectiveness was linked to limited media sources and rapid feedback capabilities.