US Military Service Members' Reasons for Deciding to Participate in Health Research

Recruitment and retention of clinical trial participants: understanding motivations of patients with chronic pain and other populations

This paper aims to present and discuss the issues, challenges, and strategies related to recruitment and retention in clinical trials involving participants with chronic pain. The randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) is widely regarded as the gold standard for evaluating clinical interventions. However, it is crucial to acknowledge and address the challenges associated with recruiting and retaining participants. To prioritize the experience of the study population, targeted outreach strategies and a patient-centric approach are necessary. Researchers should consider incorporating recruitment and retention strategies during the study design phase. Implementing multi-pronged recruitment methods, leveraging relationships with community providers, and involving representatives of the patient population are helpful approaches. Effective communication and maintaining a professional environment are vital for optimizing engagement and supporting the successful execution of clinical trials involving participants with chronic pain.

Challenges With Engaging Military Stakeholders for Clinical Research at the Point of Care in the U.S. Military Health System

The DoD has a specific mission that creates unique challenges for the conduct of clinical research. These unique challenges include (1) the fact that medical readiness is the number one priority, (2) understanding the role of military culture, and (3) understanding the highly transient flow of operations. Appropriate engagement with key stakeholders at the point of care, where research activities are executed, can mean the difference between success and failure. These key stakeholders include the beneficiaries of the study intervention (patients), clinicians delivering the care, and the military and clinic leadership of both. Challenges to recruitment into research studies include military training, temporary duty, and deployments that can disrupt availability for participation. Seeking medical care is still stigmatized in some military settings. Uniformed personnel, including clinicians, patients, and leaders, are constantly changing, often relocating every 2-4 years, limiting their ability to support clinical trials in this setting which often take 5-7 years to plan and execute. When relevant stakeholders are constantly changing, keeping them engaged becomes an enduring priority. Military leaders are driven by the ability to meet the demands of the assigned mission (readiness). Command endorsement and support are critical for service members to participate in stakeholder engagement panels or clinical trials offering novel treatments. To translate science into relevant practice within the Military Health System, early engagement with key stakeholders at the point of care and addressing mission-relevant factors is critical for success.

Public views regarding the responsibility of patients, clinicians, and institutions to participate in research in the United States

BACKGROUND

The need for more and better evidence to inform clinical decision making among all stakeholders has fueled calls for creating learning healthcare systems. The successful realization of a learning healthcare system seems to assume that various parties have a responsibility to participate in learning activities, including research. The objective of this study was to determine whether members of the general public perceive an ethical responsibility to participate in pragmatic clinical research that would be inherent to a learning health system.

METHODS

A total of 2994 English-speaking adults completed a nationally representative online survey.

RESULTS

About two-thirds of respondents were relatively neutral regarding a responsibility for themselves and others to participate in research; the remainder felt that they and others did not have a responsibility to participate in research.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to justify and develop a robust learning health system in an ethically acceptable fashion need to take these findings into account.