Web-based behavioral interventions for substance use are being developed at a rapid pace, yet there is a dearth of information regarding the most effective methods for recruiting participants into web-based intervention trials. In this paper, we describe our successful recruitment of participants into a pilot trial of web-based Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) for smoking cessation and compare traditional and web-based methods of recruitment in terms of their effects on baseline participant characteristics, association with study retention and treatment outcome, yield, and cost-effectiveness. Over a 10-week period starting June 15, 2010, we recruited 222 smokers for a web-based smoking cessation study using a variety of recruitment methods. The largest portion of randomized participants were recruited through Google AdWords (36%), followed by medical Internet media (23%), standard media (14%), word of mouth (12%), broadcast emails (11%), and social media (6%). Recruitment source was not related to baseline participant characteristics, 3-month data retention, or 30-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at the 3-month outcome assessment. Cost per randomized participant ranged from $5.27/participant for word of mouth to $172.76/participant for social media, with a mean cost of $42.48/participant. Our diversified approach to recruitment, including both traditional and web-based methods, enabled timely enrollment of participants into the study. Because there was no evidence of a substantive difference in baseline characteristics, retention, or outcomes based on recruitment channel, the yield and cost-effectiveness of recruitment methods may be the more critical considerations in developing a feasible recruitment plan for a web-based smoking cessation intervention study.

Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is highly prevalent in patients with End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) treated with maintenance hemodialysis (HD). Despite the high prevalence and robust data demonstrating an independent association between depression and poor clinical and patient-reported outcomes, MDD is under-treated when identified in such patients. This may in part be due to the paucity of evidence confirming the safety and efficacy of treatments for depression in this population. It is also unclear whether HD patients are interested in receiving treatment for depression. ASCEND (Clinical Trials Identifier Number NCT02358343), A Trial of Sertraline vs. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) for End-stage Renal Disease Patients with Depression, was designed as a multi-center, 12-week, open-label, randomized, controlled trial of prevalent HD patients with comorbid MDD or dysthymia. It will compare (1) a single Engagement Interview vs. a control visit for the probability of initiating treatment for comorbid depression in up to 400 patients; and (2) individual chair-side CBT vs. flexible-dose treatment with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, sertraline, for improvement of depressive symptoms in 180 of the up to 400 patients. The evolution of depressive symptoms will also be examined in a prospective longitudinal cohort of 90 HD patients who choose not to be treated for depression. We discuss the rationale and design of ASCEND, the first large-scale randomized controlled trial evaluating efficacy of non-pharmacologic vs. pharmacologic treatment of depression in HD patients for patient-centered outcomes.

No abstract

No abstract