McLaren Health Care, Flint, Michigan, United States of America.
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2022 Apr 22;17(4):e0267534. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267534. eCollection 2022.
BACKGROUND: Recruitment plays a vital role in conducting randomized control trials (RCTs). Challenges and failure of proper recruitment lead to early termination of trials. Monetary incentives have been suggested as a potential solution to these challenges. Therefore, we aimed to do a systematic review and analysis to evaluate the effect of incentives on the number of participants willing to consent to and participate in RCTs. METHODS: Electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to September 23rd, 2021, using the following keywords: payments, incentive, response, participation, enrollment, randomized, randomization, and RCT. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess the quality of the included trials. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). All analyses were done with the random-effects model. We used Revman software to perform the analysis. RESULTS: Six RCTs with 6,253 Participants met the inclusion criteria. Our analysis showed significant improvement in response rate (RR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.55; P = 0.02) and consent rates (RR: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.11, 1.85; P = 0.006) when an incentive payment was offered to participants. Even a small amount of incentive showed significant improvement in both consent (RR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.73; P = 0.03) and response rates (RR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.47; P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrated statistically significant increases in the rate of consent and responses from participants when offered even small monetary value incentives. These findings suggest that incentives may be used to reduce the rate of recruitment failure and subsequent study termination. However, further RCTs are needed to establish a critical threshold beyond which incentive amount does not alter response rates further and the types of RCTs in which financial incentives are likely to be effective.
背景:招募在进行随机对照试验(RCT)中起着至关重要的作用。招募方面的挑战和失败会导致试验提前终止。有人提出金钱激励措施是解决这些挑战的一种潜在方法。因此,我们旨在进行系统评价和分析,以评估激励措施对愿意同意并参与 RCT 的参与者人数的影响。
方法:从成立到 2021 年 9 月 23 日,我们通过以下关键词系统地搜索了电子数据库:付款、激励、反应、参与、入组、随机、随机化和 RCT。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估纳入试验的质量。使用相应的 95%置信区间(CI)计算风险比(RR)。所有分析均采用随机效应模型。我们使用 Revman 软件进行分析。
结果:纳入的 6 项 RCT 共有 6253 名参与者,符合纳入标准。我们的分析表明,当向参与者提供激励付款时,反应率(RR:1.27;95%CI:1.04,1.55;P=0.02)和同意率(RR:1.44;95%CI:1.11,1.85;P=0.006)有显著提高。即使是少量的激励也显著提高了同意率(RR:1.33;95%CI:1.03,1.73;P=0.03)和反应率(RR:1.26;95%CI:1.08,1.47;P=0.004)。
结论:总之,我们的荟萃分析表明,即使提供少量货币价值的激励,也能显著提高参与者的同意率和反应率。这些发现表明,激励措施可能用于降低招募失败率和随后的研究终止率。然而,需要进一步的 RCT 来确定激励金额进一步改变反应率的关键阈值,以及哪种类型的 RCT 中财务激励措施可能有效。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-6-6
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011-9-7
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012-10-17
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015-5-18
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-11-15
Alzheimers Dement Behav Socioecon Aging. 2025-9
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2025-12
JAMA Intern Med. 2021-11-1
Medicoleg Bioeth. 2015-6-24