How are we communicating about clinical trials?

Clinical trials (CTs) are important for advancing public health and medical research, however, CT recruitment is challenging. The high reading level of CT information and the technical language of providers or researchers can serve as barriers to recruitment. Prior studies on the informed consent process found that consent documents often contain complicated terms. Limited research has examined resources specifically used to recruit individuals into CTs. The purpose of this study was to examine the content and readability of CT recruitment education resources in one U.S. state. Convenience sampling was employed for the collection of CT recruitment materials. A codebook was developed based on previous content analyses and emergent themes from statewide focus groups about CTs. A total of 127 materials were collected and analyzed (37.8% print; 62.2% Web). Most content was focused on treatment-related CTs (60.6%). Inclusion criteria related to specific disease conditions (88.9%) and age (73.6%) were described most often. Only 30% of resources had an explicit call to action. Overall mean readability level was Grade 11.7. Web-based materials were significantly more likely to be written at a higher grade level than print materials (p ≤ .0001). Readability also differed significantly according to resource distributor/creator, CT type, person quoted, and presence or absence of inclusion criteria and an explicit call to action. Our study provides insight into the content and difficulty level of recruitment materials intended to provide initial information about a CT. Future studies should examine individuals' comprehension of recruitment materials and how participation intentions are associated with recruitment messages.