The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Evidence for strategies that improve recruitment and retention of adults aged 65 years and over in randomised trials and observational studies: a systematic review

Evidence for strategies that improve recruitment and retention of adults aged 65 years and over in randomised trials and observational studies: a systematic review
Evidence for strategies that improve recruitment and retention of adults aged 65 years and over in randomised trials and observational studies: a systematic review
Background: adults aged ≥65 years are often excluded from health research studies. Lack of representation reduces generalisability of treatments for this age group.

Objective: to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies that improve recruitment and retention of adults aged ≥65 in observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods: searches conducted in 10 databases for RCTs of recruitment and retention strategies in RCTs or observational studies. Two reviewers screened abstracts and full-text articles for eligibility and extracted data. Studies without separate data for adults aged ≥65 were discarded. Risk of bias assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were synthesised narratively.

Results: thirty-two studies were included in the review (n = 75,444). Twelve studies had low risk of bias, of which 10 had successful strategies including: Opt-out versus opt-in increased recruitment (13.6% (n = 261)−18.7% (n = 36) difference; two studies); Advance notification increased retention (1.6% difference, OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.01, 2.10, one study (n = 2,686); 9.1% difference at 4 months, 1.44; 1.08, 1.92, one study (n = 753)); Hand-delivered versus postal surveys increased response (25.1% difference; X2 = 11.40, P < 0.01; one study (n = 139)); Open randomised design versus blinded RCT increased recruitment (1.56; 1.05, 2.33) and retention (13.9% difference; 3.1%, 24.6%) in one study (n = 538). Risk of bias was high/unclear for studies in which incentives or shorter length questionnaires increased response.

Discussion: in low risk of bias studies, few of the strategies that improved participation in older adults had been tested in ≥1 study. Opt-out and advance notification strategies improved recruitment and retention, respectively, although an opt-out approach may have ethical limitations. Evidence from single studies limits the generalisability of other strategies.
0002-0729
895–903
Lacey, Rosie J.
6a5ba7da-7730-4e36-9448-7291d24f9809
Wilkie, Ross
c9da6f93-3977-41d0-9c2f-da272b1e8ce3
Wynne-Jones, Gwenllian
48fa6391-16e4-4668-8ded-b99d97fe8d7c
Jordan, Joanne L.
485eacb4-74d2-462c-83e3-f63336961c59
Wersocki, Emily
d876ba05-ae6f-476d-a194-c3f3d20f6c89
McBeth, John
98012716-66ba-480b-9e43-ac53b51dce61
Lacey, Rosie J.
6a5ba7da-7730-4e36-9448-7291d24f9809
Wilkie, Ross
c9da6f93-3977-41d0-9c2f-da272b1e8ce3
Wynne-Jones, Gwenllian
48fa6391-16e4-4668-8ded-b99d97fe8d7c
Jordan, Joanne L.
485eacb4-74d2-462c-83e3-f63336961c59
Wersocki, Emily
d876ba05-ae6f-476d-a194-c3f3d20f6c89
McBeth, John
98012716-66ba-480b-9e43-ac53b51dce61

Lacey, Rosie J., Wilkie, Ross, Wynne-Jones, Gwenllian, Jordan, Joanne L., Wersocki, Emily and McBeth, John (2017) Evidence for strategies that improve recruitment and retention of adults aged 65 years and over in randomised trials and observational studies: a systematic review. Age and Ageing, 46 (6), 895–903. (doi:10.1093/ageing/afx057).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: adults aged ≥65 years are often excluded from health research studies. Lack of representation reduces generalisability of treatments for this age group.

Objective: to evaluate the effectiveness of strategies that improve recruitment and retention of adults aged ≥65 in observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods: searches conducted in 10 databases for RCTs of recruitment and retention strategies in RCTs or observational studies. Two reviewers screened abstracts and full-text articles for eligibility and extracted data. Studies without separate data for adults aged ≥65 were discarded. Risk of bias assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results were synthesised narratively.

Results: thirty-two studies were included in the review (n = 75,444). Twelve studies had low risk of bias, of which 10 had successful strategies including: Opt-out versus opt-in increased recruitment (13.6% (n = 261)−18.7% (n = 36) difference; two studies); Advance notification increased retention (1.6% difference, OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.01, 2.10, one study (n = 2,686); 9.1% difference at 4 months, 1.44; 1.08, 1.92, one study (n = 753)); Hand-delivered versus postal surveys increased response (25.1% difference; X2 = 11.40, P < 0.01; one study (n = 139)); Open randomised design versus blinded RCT increased recruitment (1.56; 1.05, 2.33) and retention (13.9% difference; 3.1%, 24.6%) in one study (n = 538). Risk of bias was high/unclear for studies in which incentives or shorter length questionnaires increased response.

Discussion: in low risk of bias studies, few of the strategies that improved participation in older adults had been tested in ≥1 study. Opt-out and advance notification strategies improved recruitment and retention, respectively, although an opt-out approach may have ethical limitations. Evidence from single studies limits the generalisability of other strategies.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

e-pub ahead of print date: 8 May 2017
Published date: November 2017

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 491460
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/491460
ISSN: 0002-0729
PURE UUID: 3294b175-b2e1-44fc-9cc7-d6ec973586c9
ORCID for John McBeth: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-7047-2183

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 24 Jun 2024 16:57
Last modified: 25 Jun 2024 02:10

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Rosie J. Lacey
Author: Ross Wilkie
Author: Gwenllian Wynne-Jones
Author: Joanne L. Jordan
Author: Emily Wersocki
Author: John McBeth ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×