Evidence Hub

Effectiveness of clinical trial recruitment strategies in a safety-net hospital

Kelsey A. Barnick, Jackie Jacobs, Whitney Wood, Lizbeth Garcia, Yasmeen Santana, Patricia Z Labellarte, Helen Margellos-Anast, Christina Wagener

Contemporary Clinical Trials, 2026

30,772 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recruitment of underserved populations into clinical trials is difficult. Understanding which recruitment methods are most effective is essential to increasing recruitment yields. Moreover, knowledge of how many contact attempts should be conducted before a patient is considered non-responsive is also of interest as it can guide prioritization of patient outreach.

METHODS

The Improving Diabetes Equity and Advancing care study is a randomized controlled trial of diabetes management strategies among Black and/or Latine patients. Patients were recruited using four methods (in-person, phone, flyer, community health worker [CHW] referral). We calculated enrollment rates, number of contact attempts needed to enroll, and sociodemographic differences by recruitment method.

RESULTS

We screened 30,772 patients for eligibility, contacted 789 patients who met eligibility criteria, and enrolled 104 patients into the study for an enrollment rate of 13.2%. Twenty-nine percent, 8%, 14%, 14%, and 7% of patients were enrolled in the study in-person, by phone, by a combination of methods, by flyer, and by CHW referral, respectively. Two-thirds of enrolled patients enrolled on the first or second contact attempt. Latine patients and patients of low socioeconomic status were more likely to be recruited in person.

CONCLUSIONS

In-person recruitment had the highest rate of enrollment success. The combination approach was less effective than in-person alone, and flyer and CHW referral…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 30,772 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free