MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7117307685 · doi:10.1002/alz70859_106584

A Model for Community‐based Recruitment for Dementia Clinical Trials

2025· article· en· W7117307685 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brittany J. Prokop, Natalie Dren, Winnie Qian, Victoria Telford, Jordanne Holland, Tarek K. Rajji, David F. Tang‐Wai, Luca F. Pisterzi

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsAlzheimer Society of CanadaToronto Western HospitalToronto Dementia Research AllianceUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoBaycrest HospitalCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical trialDementiaMatching (statistics)Yield (engineering)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Successful enrollment of participants into clinical dementia trials remains one of the more challenging aspects of clinical research, as barriers exist for both potential participants and recruiting clinicians. Currently, a mechanism is lacking to engage the community. METHOD: The Toronto Dementia Research Alliance (TDRA) and the Alzheimer Society of Toronto (AST) co-developed a web recruitment platform, Toronto Dementia Network (TDN) (https://tdn.alz.to/research-studies/) to enable persons living with dementia, their caregivers, and healthy volunteers, to discover trials and to connect clinicians to otherwise inaccessible participants. The platform features plain-language summaries of investigator-initiated clinical trials. Potential participants can perform key-word searches, use predetermined filters, or fill out a questionnaire to be matched to a suitable trial by TDRA staff. Their contact information is securely captured and shared with the site leading the trial of interest. Once transferred, staff leading that trial contact the individual who made the request. This triage system is tracked and monitored by TDRA. This platform is featured in TDRA's monthly newsletter and through a bi-monthly webinar series. RESULT: 2025, 60 studies have been registered on the TDN site. 266 potential participants have demonstrated interest. Overall, this method has led to 34% of participant referrals becoming enrolled in a study. Specifically, 36% of referrals via TDRA-assisted screening and study matching have led to enrollments/study completions, while 30% of participant self-referrals have led to enrollments/study completions - higher than traditional recruitment methods. CONCLUSION: A patient-friendly web-based approach for participation into clinical trials is possible. We have demonstrated that such an approach can yield over 30% recruitment. In addition, having a research team dedicated to screening, triaging and matching participants to appropriate studies results in a higher enrollment rate than self-referrals.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.387
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.404
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3870.404
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0130.013
Open science0.0100.015
Research integrity0.0110.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.025

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.893
GPT teacher head0.676
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicEthics in Clinical Research→French-language works237,207→