Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug 18;10(1):233.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01790-7.

Enrollment, retention, and strategies for including disadvantaged populations in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review protocol

Affiliations

Enrollment, retention, and strategies for including disadvantaged populations in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review protocol

Abigail LaPlante et al. Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Many randomized controlled trials fail to reach their target sample size. When coupled with the omission and underrepresentation of disadvantaged groups in randomized controlled trials, many trials fail to obtain data that accurately represents the true diversity of their target population. Policies and practices have been implemented to increase representation of disadvantaged groups in many randomized controlled trials, with some trials specifically targeting such groups. To our knowledge, no systematic review has quantified the enrollment metrics and effectiveness of inclusion and retention strategies in randomized controlled trials focused on disadvantaged populations specifically.

Methods: We will conduct a systematic search across EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and CINAHL as well as grey literature, conference proceedings, research monographs, and Google Scholar from inception onwards. We will include randomized controlled trials where at least 50% of enrolled participants are considered to be disadvantaged, as per the RCT authors' definition and in line with our inclusion criteria. Two independent researchers per article will conduct preliminary title and abstract screening, subsequent full text review, and data extraction for the selected trials, with a third reviewer available to resolve conflicts. We will assess the quality of all included studies using specific criteria regarding data reporting, external validity, and internal validity. We will combine all selected studies and conduct a narrative synthesis to assess enrollment metrics. If there is sufficient homogeneity and sufficient trials comparing recruitment strategies within disadvantaged populations, we will conduct a random effects meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies designed to maximize the inclusion of disadvantaged populations in randomized controlled trials.

Discussion: The findings of this systematic review will establish baseline recruitment and enrollment metrics of trials targeting disadvantaged populations to elucidate the scope of the challenge of recruiting such populations. We hope that our findings will promote future research on the distinct barriers that may prevent disadvantaged populations from participating in health intervention research, will encourage more trials exploring effective, tailored recruitment strategies, and will establish a foundation to track future progress in the recruitment of disadvantaged populations.

Trial registrations: PROSPERO ID: CRD42020152814.

Keywords: Disadvantaged populations; Disparities; Enrollment; Health; Health interventions; Randomized controlled trials; Retention; Trial recruitment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. NIH Peer Review. Guidelines for the review of inclusion on the basis of sex/gender, race, ethnicity, and age in clinical research. 2019 [cited 2020 Sep 14]. Available from: https://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer/guidelines_general/Review_Human_subje...
    1. Rogers WA. Evidence based medicine and justice: a framework for looking at the impact of EBM upon vulnerable or disadvantaged groups. J Med Ethics. 2004;30(2):141–145. doi: 10.1136/jme.2003.007062. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kagawa-Singer M. Improving the validity and generalizability of studies with underserved U.S. populations expanding the research paradigm. Ann Epidemiol. 2000;10(8 Suppl):S92–103. doi: 10.1016/S1047-2797(00)00192-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Albain KS, Unger JM, Crowley JJ, Coltman CA, Jr, Hershman DL. Racial disparities in cancer survival among randomized clinical trials patients of the Southwest Oncology Group. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101(14):984–992. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp175. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Britton A, McKee M, Black N, McPherson K, Sanderson C, Bain C. Threats to applicability of randomised trials: exclusions and selective participation. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1999;4(2):112–121. doi: 10.1177/135581969900400210. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources