SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Recruiting patients into a digital behavioural intervention in general practice: insights from the ENERGISED trial

Kral, N; Vetrovsky, T; Pfeiferova, M; Seifert, B; Capek, V; Jurkova, K; Steffl, M; Cimler, R; Kuhnova, J; Ussher, M; et al. Kral, N; Vetrovsky, T; Pfeiferova, M; Seifert, B; Capek, V; Jurkova, K; Steffl, M; Cimler, R; Kuhnova, J; Ussher, M; Wahlich, C; Malisova, K; Pelclova, J; Dygryn, J; Elavsky, S; Maes, I; Van Dyck, D; Rowlands, A; Yates, T; Dvorak, P; Harris, T (2026) Recruiting patients into a digital behavioural intervention in general practice: insights from the ENERGISED trial. BMC Primary Care. ISSN 2731-4553
SGUL Authors: Ussher, Michael Henry

[img] Microsoft Word (.docx) Accepted Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (51kB)

Abstract

Background Recruiting patients into randomised controlled trials in general practice is challenging and carries a substantial risk of bias. The ENERGISED trial evaluated a digitally supported behavioural intervention to increase physical activity in patients with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes recruited through general practice. To minimise bias, the trial employed a systematic recruitment strategy where general practitioners assessed patient eligibility from random stratified samples of their registers and sought consent from those deemed eligible. This study aimed to analyse the ENERGISED trial’s recruitment process and identify sources of potential bias arising from general practitioners' eligibility assessments (selection bias) and patient consent (self-selection bias). Methods Patients with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes were randomly sampled from the registers of 28 Czech general practices using sex- and diagnosis-stratified lists. Eligibility was systematically assessed during routine practice visits, with general practitioners documenting reasons for ineligibility. All eligible patients were invited to participate, and reasons for non-consent were recorded. Logistic mixed-effects models were used to examine the influence of patient characteristics (age, sex, diagnosis) and general practitioner characteristics on eligibility and consent. Results Of 1,376 sampled patients, 1,138 (83%) were assessed, 792 (70% of assessed) were eligible, 348 (44% of eligible) consented and 343 were randomised. Older age was associated with lower odds of eligibility (OR 0.955, 95% CI 0.942–0.968; p < 0.001) and lower odds of consent among eligible patients (OR 0.972, 95% CI 0.958–0.986; p < 0.001). Ineligibility was most often due to digital barriers (227 cases, 44.6% of ineligible). Practices with older registered populations showed stronger age-related bias. Female practitioners and practices with more diabetes/prediabetes patients achieved significantly higher eligibility rates. Conclusions Systematic recruitment through general practice can reduce selection and self-selection bias, yet digital exclusion, particularly in older adults, persists. Future trials must proactively address digital literacy and age-related barriers to ensure representative participation in digital health research.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © The Author(s) 2026. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Population Health Research Institute (INPH)
Journal or Publication Title: BMC Primary Care
ISSN: 2731-4553
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
NU21–09–00007Czech Health Research CouncilUNSPECIFIED
Dates:
Date Event
2026-03-03 Published
2026-02-05 Accepted
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/118401

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item