Effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an Alzheimer's disease prevention clinical trial
Abstract Introduction Low awareness of Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials is a recruitment barrier. To assess whether online education may affect screening rates for AD prevention clinical trials, we conducted an initial prospective cohort study (n = 10,450) and subsequent randomized stud...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2020-01-01
|
| Series: | Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12006 |
| _version_ | 1818870107468726272 |
|---|---|
| author | Nabeel Saif Cara Berkowitz Susmit Tripathi Olivia Scheyer Emily Caesar Hollie Hristov Katherine Hackett Aneela Rahman Newman Knowlton George Sadek Paige Lee Mark McInnis Richard S. Isaacson |
| author_facet | Nabeel Saif Cara Berkowitz Susmit Tripathi Olivia Scheyer Emily Caesar Hollie Hristov Katherine Hackett Aneela Rahman Newman Knowlton George Sadek Paige Lee Mark McInnis Richard S. Isaacson |
| author_sort | Nabeel Saif |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Introduction Low awareness of Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials is a recruitment barrier. To assess whether online education may affect screening rates for AD prevention clinical trials, we conducted an initial prospective cohort study (n = 10,450) and subsequent randomized study (n = 351) using an online digital tool: AlzU.org. Methods A total of 10,450 participants were enrolled in an initial cohort study and asked to complete a six‐lesson course on AlzU.org, as well as a baseline and 6‐month follow‐up questionnaire. Participants were stratified into three groups based on lesson completion at 6 months: group 1 (zero to one lesson completed), group 2 (two to four lessons), and group 3 (five or more lessons). For the subsequent randomized‐controlled trial (RCT), 351 new participants were enrolled in a six‐lesson course (n = 180) versus a time‐neutral control (n = 171). Screening and enrollment in the Anti‐Amyloid Treatment in Asymptomatic AD (A4) clinical trial were reported via the 6‐month questionnaire and are the primary outcomes. Results Cohort: 3.9% of group 1, 5% of group 2, and 8.4% of group 3 screened for the A4 trial. Significant differences were found among the groups (P < 0.001). Post hoc analyses showed differences in A4 screening rates between groups 1 and 3 (P < 0.001) and groups 2 and 3 (P = 0.0194). There were no differences in enrollment among the three groups. RCT: 2.78% of the intervention group screened for A4 compared to 0% of controls (P = 0.0611). Discussion Online education via the AlzU.org digital tool may serve as an effective strategy to supplement clinical trial recruitment. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-19T12:01:46Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5606a4dad42341cbb72020239c7e0d0f |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2352-8737 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-19T12:01:46Z |
| publishDate | 2020-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions |
| spelling | doaj.art-5606a4dad42341cbb72020239c7e0d0f2022-12-21T20:22:28ZengWileyAlzheimer’s & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions2352-87372020-01-0161n/an/a10.1002/trc2.12006Effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an Alzheimer's disease prevention clinical trialNabeel Saif0Cara Berkowitz1Susmit Tripathi2Olivia Scheyer3Emily Caesar4Hollie Hristov5Katherine Hackett6Aneela Rahman7Newman Knowlton8George Sadek9Paige Lee10Mark McInnis11Richard S. Isaacson12Department of Neurology Weill Cornell Medicine & New York‐Presbyterian New York New YorkDepartment of Neurology Weill Cornell Medicine & New York‐Presbyterian New York New YorkDepartment of Neurology Weill Cornell Medicine & New York‐Presbyterian New York New YorkSchool of Law University of California Los Angeles Los Angeles CaliforniaLoyola School of Medicine Chicago IllinoisDepartment of Neurology Weill Cornell Medicine & New York‐Presbyterian New York New YorkDepartment of Psychology Temple University Philadelphia PennsylvaniaDepartment of Neurology Weill Cornell Medicine & New York‐Presbyterian New York New YorkBiostatistics Pentara Corporation Salt Lake City UtahDepartment of Neurology Weill Cornell Medicine & New York‐Presbyterian New York New YorkCollege of Letters and Science University of California Los Angeles Los Angeles CaliforniaWishbone Productions Boston MassachusettsDepartment of Neurology Weill Cornell Medicine & New York‐Presbyterian New York New YorkAbstract Introduction Low awareness of Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials is a recruitment barrier. To assess whether online education may affect screening rates for AD prevention clinical trials, we conducted an initial prospective cohort study (n = 10,450) and subsequent randomized study (n = 351) using an online digital tool: AlzU.org. Methods A total of 10,450 participants were enrolled in an initial cohort study and asked to complete a six‐lesson course on AlzU.org, as well as a baseline and 6‐month follow‐up questionnaire. Participants were stratified into three groups based on lesson completion at 6 months: group 1 (zero to one lesson completed), group 2 (two to four lessons), and group 3 (five or more lessons). For the subsequent randomized‐controlled trial (RCT), 351 new participants were enrolled in a six‐lesson course (n = 180) versus a time‐neutral control (n = 171). Screening and enrollment in the Anti‐Amyloid Treatment in Asymptomatic AD (A4) clinical trial were reported via the 6‐month questionnaire and are the primary outcomes. Results Cohort: 3.9% of group 1, 5% of group 2, and 8.4% of group 3 screened for the A4 trial. Significant differences were found among the groups (P < 0.001). Post hoc analyses showed differences in A4 screening rates between groups 1 and 3 (P < 0.001) and groups 2 and 3 (P = 0.0194). There were no differences in enrollment among the three groups. RCT: 2.78% of the intervention group screened for A4 compared to 0% of controls (P = 0.0611). Discussion Online education via the AlzU.org digital tool may serve as an effective strategy to supplement clinical trial recruitment.https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12006Alzheimer's diseaseAlzheimer's prevention clinical trialsclinical trial screeningdigital toole‐learningonline education |
| spellingShingle | Nabeel Saif Cara Berkowitz Susmit Tripathi Olivia Scheyer Emily Caesar Hollie Hristov Katherine Hackett Aneela Rahman Newman Knowlton George Sadek Paige Lee Mark McInnis Richard S. Isaacson Effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an Alzheimer's disease prevention clinical trial Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions Alzheimer's disease Alzheimer's prevention clinical trials clinical trial screening digital tool e‐learning online education |
| title | Effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an Alzheimer's disease prevention clinical trial |
| title_full | Effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an Alzheimer's disease prevention clinical trial |
| title_fullStr | Effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an Alzheimer's disease prevention clinical trial |
| title_full_unstemmed | Effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an Alzheimer's disease prevention clinical trial |
| title_short | Effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an Alzheimer's disease prevention clinical trial |
| title_sort | effectiveness of online education for recruitment to an alzheimer s disease prevention clinical trial |
| topic | Alzheimer's disease Alzheimer's prevention clinical trials clinical trial screening digital tool e‐learning online education |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12006 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT nabeelsaif effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT caraberkowitz effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT susmittripathi effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT oliviascheyer effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT emilycaesar effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT holliehristov effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT katherinehackett effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT aneelarahman effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT newmanknowlton effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT georgesadek effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT paigelee effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT markmcinnis effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial AT richardsisaacson effectivenessofonlineeducationforrecruitmenttoanalzheimersdiseasepreventionclinicaltrial |