Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can provide high quality evidence about the comparative effectiveness of health care interventions, but many RCTs struggle with or fail to complete recruitment. RCTs are built on the principles of the experimental method, but their planning, conduct, and interpretation can depend on complex social, behavioral, and cultural factors that may be best understood through qualitative research. Most qualitative studies undertaken alongside RCTs involve interviews that produce data that are used in a supportive or supplicatory role, but there is potential for qualitative research to be more influential. In this article, we describe the research methods underpinning the “QuinteT” (Qualitative Research Integrated Within Trials) approach to understand and address RCT recruitment difficulties. The QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) brings together multiple qualitative strategies and quantitative data and uses triangulation to understand recruitment issues rapidly. These nuanced understandings are used to inform the implementation of collaborative actions to improve recruitment.
AmstutzA.SchandelmaierS.FreiR.SurinaJ.AgarwalA.OluK. K.. . . BrielM. (2017). Discontinuation and non-publication of randomised clinical trials supported by the main public funding body in Switzerland: A retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open, 7(7), e016216. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016216
2.
BegunJ. W.ZimmermanB.DooleyK. (2003). Health care organizations as complex adaptive systems. In MickS. M.WyttenbachM. (Eds.), Advances in health care organization theory ((pp. 253–288). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3.
CampbellM. K.SnowdonC.FrancisD.ElbourneD.McDonaldA. M.KnightR.. . . GrantA. (2007). Recruitment to randomised trials: Strategies for trial enrollment and participation study. The STEPS study. Health Technology Assessment, 11(48), iii, ix–105. doi:10.3310/hta11480
4.
ClementC.EdwardsS. L.RapportF.RussellI. T.HutchingsH. A. (2018). Exploring qualitative methods reported in registered trials and their yields (EQUITY): systematic review. Trials, 19(1), 589. doi:10.1186/s13063-018-2983-y
5.
DenzinN. K. (1978). Sociological methods: A sourcebook. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
6.
de SalisI.TomlinZ.ToerienM.DonovanJ. (2008). Qualitative research to improve RCT recruitment: Issues arising in establishing research collaborations. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 29, 663–670. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2008.03.003
7.
DonovanJ. L.de SalisI.ToerienM.ParamasivanS.HamdyF. C.BlazebyJ. M. (2014). The intellectual challenges and emotional consequences of equipoise contributed to the fragility of recruitment in six randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67, 912–920. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.010
8.
DonovanJ. L.HamdyF. C.LaneJ. A.MasonM.MetcalfeC.WalshE.. . . NealD. E. (2016). Patient-reported outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine, 375, 1425–1437. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1606221
9.
DonovanJ. L.LaneA. J.PetersT. J.BrindleL.SalterE.GillattD.. . . HamdyF. C. (2009). Development of a complex intervention improved randomization and informed consent in a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62, 29–36. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.02.010
10.
DonovanJ. L.MillsN.SmithM.BrindleL.JacobyA.PetersT.. . . HamdyF. (2002). Quality improvement report: Improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. British Medical Journal, 325, Article 766. doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7367.766
11.
DonovanJ. L.ParamasivanS.de SalisI.ToerienM. (2014). Clear obstacles and hidden challenges: Understanding recruiter perspectives in six pragmatic randomised controlled trials. Trials, 15, Article 5. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-5
12.
DonovanJ. L.RooshenasL.JepsonM.ElliottD.WadeJ.AveryK.. . . BlazebyJ. M. (2016). Optimising recruitment and informed consent in randomised controlled trials: The development and implementation of the Quintet Recruitment Intervention (QRI). Trials, 17(1), Article 283. doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1391-4
13.
FlemmingK.AdamsonJ.AtkinK. (2008). Improving the effectiveness of interventions in palliative care: The potential role of qualitative research in enhancing evidence from randomized controlled trials. Palliative Medicine, 22, 123–131. doi:10.1177/0269216307087319
14.
FletcherB.GheorgheA.MooreD.WilsonS.DameryS. (2012). Improving the recruitment activity of clinicians in randomised controlled trials: A systematic review. BMJ Open, 2(1), e000496. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000496
15.
GarfinkelH. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
16.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
17.
HamdyF. C.DonovanJ. L.LaneJ. A.MasonM.MetcalfeC.HoldingP.. . . NealD. E. (2016). 10-year outcomes after monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine, 375, 1415–1424. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1606220
18.
HealyP.GalvinS.WilliamsonP. R.TreweekS.WhitingC.MaesoB.. . . DevaneD. (2018). Identifying trial recruitment uncertainties using a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership—The PRioRiTy (Prioritising Recruitment in Randomised Trials) study. Trials, 19(1), Article 147. doi:10.1186/s13063-018-2544-4
19.
JepsonM.ElliottD.ConefreyC.WadeJ.RooshenasL.WilsonC.. . . DonovanJ. L. (2018). An observational study showed that explaining randomization using gambling-related metaphors and computer-agency descriptions impeded randomized clinical trial recruitment. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 99, 75–83. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.02.018
20.
KasendaB.von ElmE.YouJ.BlümleA.TomonagaY.SaccilottoR.. . . BrielM. (2014). Prevalence, characteristics, and publication of discontinued randomized trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 311, 1045–1051. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.1361
21.
MillsN.DonovanJ. L.WadeJ.HamdyF. C.NealD. E.LaneJ. A. (2011). Exploring treatment preferences facilitated recruitment to randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64, 1127–1136. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.12.017
22.
O’CathainA.ThomasK. J.DrabbleS. J.RudolphA.GoodeJ.HewisonJ. (2014). Maximising the value of combining qualitative research and randomised controlled trials in health research: The QUAlitative Research in Trials (QUART) study—A mixed methods study. Health Technology Assessment, 18(38), 1–197. doi:10.3310/hta18380
23.
ParamasivanS.HuddartR.HallE.LewisR.BirtleA.DonovanJ. L. (2011). Key issues in recruitment to randomised controlled trials with very different interventions: A qualitative investigation of recruitment to the SPARE trial (CRUK/07/011). Trials, 12, Article 78. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-12-78
24.
ParamasivanS.StrongS.WilsonC.CampbellB.BlazebyJ. M.DonovanJ. L. (2015). A simple technique to identify key recruitment issues in randomised controlled trials: Q-QAT—Quanti-Qualitative Appointment Timing. Trials, 16, Article 88. doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0617-1
25.
PattonM. Q. (1999). Enhancing the quality and credibility of qualitative analysis. Health Services Research, 34(5 Pt 2), 1189–1208.
26.
RooshenasL.ElliottD.WadeJ.JepsonM.ParamasivanS.StrongS.. . . DonovanJ. L. (2016). Conveying equipoise during recruitment for clinical trials: Qualitative synthesis of clinicians’ practices across six randomised controlled trials. PLoS Medicine, 13(10), e1002147. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002147
27.
RooshenasL.ScottL. J.BlazebyJ. M.RogersC. A.TillingK. M.HusbandsS.. . . DonovanJ. L. (2019). The Quintet Recruitment Intervention supported five randomized trials to recruit to target: A mixed-methods evaluation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 106, 108–120. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.10.004
28.
SandelowskiM. (1996). Using qualitative methods in intervention studies. Research in Nursing & Health, 19, 359–364. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-240x(199608)19:4<359::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-h
29.
SchutzA. (1967). The phenomenology of the social world. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
SealeC.SilvermanD. (1997). Ensuring rigour in qualitative research. European Journal of Public Health, 7, 379–384. doi:10.1093/eurpub/7.4.379
32.
SidnellJ.StiversT. (2012). The handbook of conversation analysis (Vol. 121). John Wiley. doi:10.1002/9781118325001
33.
SullyB. G.JuliousS. A.NichollJ. (2013). A reinvestigation of recruitment to randomised, controlled, multicenter trials: A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials, 14(1), Article 166. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-14-166
34.
Tudur SmithC.HickeyH.ClarkeM.BlazebyJ.WilliamsonP. (2014). The trials methodological research agenda: Results from a priority setting exercise. Trials, 15(1), Article 32. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-32
35.
WaltersS. J.dos Anjos Henriques-CadbyI. B.BortolamiO.FlightL.HindD.JacquesR. M.. . . JuliousS. A. (2017). Recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: A review of trials funded and published by the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Programme. BMJ Open, 7(3), e015276. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015276
36.
WilsonC.RooshenasL.ParamasivanS.ElliottD.JepsonM.StrongS.. . . DonovanJ. L. (2018). Development of a framework to improve the process of recruitment to Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs): The SEAR (Screened, Eligible, Approached, Randomised) framework. Trials, 19(1), Article 50. doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2413-6
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
