This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Siddiqi, A.-e-A. Articles by Given, B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Siddiqi, A.-e-A. Articles by Given, B. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Early participant attrition from clinical trials: role of trial design and logistics

Michigan State University, 100 Conrad Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA, siddiqi{at}msu.edu

Alla Sikorskii

Michigan State University, B515A West Fee Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

Charles W Given

Michigan State University, B108 Clinical Center, Family Practice, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

Barbara Given

Michigan State University, B515B West Fee Hall, Family Care Study, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

Background Participant attrition from randomized controlled trials reduces the statistical power of the study and can potentially introduce bias. Early identification of potential causes of attrition can help reduce patient attrition. We performed secondary analyses of two trials involving cancer patients.

Purpose To identify predictors of attrition during two early phases, i.e., from consent to screening (Phase-1), and from screening to intake interview (Phase-2) in two clinical trials.

Methods Cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy were asked to enroll in one of two clinical trials. In each trial the benefits of a cognitive behavioral intervention were compared with a psycho-educational intervention to assist patients to manage cancer and treatment-related symptoms. Following consent patients were screened for their symptoms' severity to determine their eligibility.

Results Of the 885 consenters 785 completed screening and of the 782 eligible for participation, 713 completed intake interview. In the first phase, longer delays between consent and first contact attempt, lower levels of patient education, minority race, and prolonged duration of screening increased the likelihood of dropping out with a significantly stronger effect on minorities than white patients. In the second phase, low education, being a minority, longer screening delays, and impact of symptom severity on enjoyment of life significantly increased probability of attrition.

Limitations Participant reported causes of attrition were not modeled; however, exclusion of patients who died during the time period of this research meant that most patients leaving the study made a conscious decision to do so.

Conclusions To assure preservation of external validity, the time between consent and randomization into the arms of a trial must be held to a minimum. Delays between contacts and run in time, that may include screening patients to assure they will benefit from a trial, must be balanced against rates of attrition. Compressing intervals between contacts is particularly important to retain minorities. Clinical Trials 2008; 5: 328—335. http://ctjsagepub.com

Clinical Trials, Vol. 5, No. 4, 328-335 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1740774508094406


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. Ell, B. Xie, and P.-J. Lee In Reply J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2009; 27(10): 1730 - 1731. [Full Text] [PDF]