Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis

<p><strong>Objective</strong> To investigate the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) on rates of enrolment and retention in clinical trials and explore how this varies with the context and nature of PPI.</p> <p><strong>Design</strong> Systematic r...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Crocker, J, Ricci-Cabello, I, Parker, A, Hirst, J, Chant, A, Petit-Zeman, S, Evans, D, Rees, S
Format: Journal article
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
_version_ 1826299771150663680
author Crocker, J
Ricci-Cabello, I
Parker, A
Hirst, J
Chant, A
Petit-Zeman, S
Evans, D
Rees, S
author_facet Crocker, J
Ricci-Cabello, I
Parker, A
Hirst, J
Chant, A
Petit-Zeman, S
Evans, D
Rees, S
author_sort Crocker, J
collection OXFORD
description <p><strong>Objective</strong> To investigate the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) on rates of enrolment and retention in clinical trials and explore how this varies with the context and nature of PPI.</p> <p><strong>Design</strong> Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p> <p><strong>Data sources</strong> Ten electronic databases, including Medline, INVOLVE Evidence Library, and clinical trial registries.</p> <p><strong>Eligibility criteria</strong> Experimental and observational studies quantitatively evaluating the impact of a PPI intervention, compared with no intervention or non-PPI intervention(s), on participant enrolment and/or retention rates in a clinical trial or trials. PPI interventions could include additional non-PPI components inseparable from the PPI (for example, other stakeholder involvement).</p> <p><strong>Data extraction and analysis</strong> Two independent reviewers extracted data on enrolment and retention rates, as well as on the context and characteristics of PPI intervention, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to determine the average effect of PPI interventions on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: main analysis including randomised studies only, secondary analysis adding non-randomised studies, and several exploratory subgroup and sensitivity analyses.</p> <p><strong>Results</strong> 26 studies were included in the review; 19 were eligible for enrolment meta-analysis and five for retention meta-analysis. Various PPI interventions were identified with different degrees of involvement, different numbers and types of people involved, and input at different stages of the trial process. On average, PPI interventions modestly but significantly increased the odds of participant enrolment in the main analysis (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval and prediction interval 1.01 to 1.34). Non-PPI components of interventions may have contributed to this effect. In exploratory subgroup analyses, the involvement of people with lived experience of the condition under study was significantly associated with improved enrolment (odds ratio 3.14 v 1.07; P=0.02). The findings for retention were inconclusive owing to the paucity of eligible studies (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 4.14), for main analysis).</p> <p><strong>Conclusions</strong> These findings add weight to the case for PPI in clinical trials by indicating that it is likely to improve enrolment of participants, especially if it includes people with lived experience of the health condition under study. Further research is needed to assess which types of PPI work best in particular contexts, the cost effectiveness of PPI, the impact of PPI at earlier stages of trial design, and the impact of PPI interventions specifically targeting retention.</p> <p><strong>Systematic review registration</strong> PROSPERO CRD42016043808</p>
first_indexed 2024-03-07T05:07:00Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:da439e5c-f7a1-4404-9d80-dc95a47539c7
institution University of Oxford
last_indexed 2024-03-07T05:07:00Z
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:da439e5c-f7a1-4404-9d80-dc95a47539c72022-03-27T09:02:10ZImpact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysisJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:da439e5c-f7a1-4404-9d80-dc95a47539c7Symplectic Elements at OxfordBMJ Publishing Group2018Crocker, JRicci-Cabello, IParker, AHirst, JChant, APetit-Zeman, SEvans, DRees, S<p><strong>Objective</strong> To investigate the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) on rates of enrolment and retention in clinical trials and explore how this varies with the context and nature of PPI.</p> <p><strong>Design</strong> Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p> <p><strong>Data sources</strong> Ten electronic databases, including Medline, INVOLVE Evidence Library, and clinical trial registries.</p> <p><strong>Eligibility criteria</strong> Experimental and observational studies quantitatively evaluating the impact of a PPI intervention, compared with no intervention or non-PPI intervention(s), on participant enrolment and/or retention rates in a clinical trial or trials. PPI interventions could include additional non-PPI components inseparable from the PPI (for example, other stakeholder involvement).</p> <p><strong>Data extraction and analysis</strong> Two independent reviewers extracted data on enrolment and retention rates, as well as on the context and characteristics of PPI intervention, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to determine the average effect of PPI interventions on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: main analysis including randomised studies only, secondary analysis adding non-randomised studies, and several exploratory subgroup and sensitivity analyses.</p> <p><strong>Results</strong> 26 studies were included in the review; 19 were eligible for enrolment meta-analysis and five for retention meta-analysis. Various PPI interventions were identified with different degrees of involvement, different numbers and types of people involved, and input at different stages of the trial process. On average, PPI interventions modestly but significantly increased the odds of participant enrolment in the main analysis (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval and prediction interval 1.01 to 1.34). Non-PPI components of interventions may have contributed to this effect. In exploratory subgroup analyses, the involvement of people with lived experience of the condition under study was significantly associated with improved enrolment (odds ratio 3.14 v 1.07; P=0.02). The findings for retention were inconclusive owing to the paucity of eligible studies (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 4.14), for main analysis).</p> <p><strong>Conclusions</strong> These findings add weight to the case for PPI in clinical trials by indicating that it is likely to improve enrolment of participants, especially if it includes people with lived experience of the health condition under study. Further research is needed to assess which types of PPI work best in particular contexts, the cost effectiveness of PPI, the impact of PPI at earlier stages of trial design, and the impact of PPI interventions specifically targeting retention.</p> <p><strong>Systematic review registration</strong> PROSPERO CRD42016043808</p>
spellingShingle Crocker, J
Ricci-Cabello, I
Parker, A
Hirst, J
Chant, A
Petit-Zeman, S
Evans, D
Rees, S
Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis
title Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials systematic review and meta analysis
work_keys_str_mv AT crockerj impactofpatientandpublicinvolvementonenrolmentandretentioninclinicaltrialssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT riccicabelloi impactofpatientandpublicinvolvementonenrolmentandretentioninclinicaltrialssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT parkera impactofpatientandpublicinvolvementonenrolmentandretentioninclinicaltrialssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hirstj impactofpatientandpublicinvolvementonenrolmentandretentioninclinicaltrialssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chanta impactofpatientandpublicinvolvementonenrolmentandretentioninclinicaltrialssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT petitzemans impactofpatientandpublicinvolvementonenrolmentandretentioninclinicaltrialssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT evansd impactofpatientandpublicinvolvementonenrolmentandretentioninclinicaltrialssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT reess impactofpatientandpublicinvolvementonenrolmentandretentioninclinicaltrialssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis