Exploring service providers’ perceptions of the barriers and enablers to recruitment of service users into social prescribing research

References

• Archer-Kuhn, B., Beltrano, N. R., Hughes, J., Saini, M., & Tam, D. (2022). Recruitment in response to a pandemic: pivoting a community-based recruitment strategy to facebook for hard-to-reach populations during COVID-19. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25(6), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2021.1941647
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barbour, R. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ (Clinical Research ed.), 322(7294), 1115–1117. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beskow, L. M., Friedman, J. Y., Hardy, N. C., Lin, L., & Weinfurt, K. P. (2010). Simplifying informed consent for biorepositories: stakeholder perspectives. Genetics in Medicine: official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 12(9), 567–572. https://doi.org/10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181ead64d
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonisteel, I., Shulman, R., Newhook, L. A., Guttmann, A., Smith, S., & Chafe, R. (2021). Reconceptualizing recruitment in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 160940692110424. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211042493
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, M., Avery, L., Scott, J., & Flynn, D. (Eds.). (2022, August 23–27). Social prescribing professionals perspectives on the barriers and enablers to the design and enablers to the design and delivery of services [Paper presentation]. 36th Annual Conference of the European Health Psychology Society: EHPS 2022, Slovakia.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, M., Flynn, D., Avery, L., Ashley, K., Jordan, C., Errington, L., & Scott, J, (Eds.). (2022). A thematic synthesis of barriers and enablers to engagement with social prescribing interventions targeting mental health. Teesside University School of Health and Life Sciences Research Conference, Teesside University, United Kingdom.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, M., Avery, L., Scott, J., Ashley, K., Jordan, C., Errington, L., & Flynn, D. (2022). Effectiveness and active ingredients of social prescribing interventions targeting mental health: a systematic review. BMJ Open, 12(7), e060214. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-060214
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, M., Flynn, D., Avery, L., Ashley, K., Jordan, C., Errington, L., & Scott, J. (2023). Service user perspectives on social prescribing services for mental health in the UK: A systematic review. Perspectives in Public Health, 143(3), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/17579139231170786
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Costa, A., Sousa, C. J., Seabra, P. R. C., Virgolino, A., Santos, O., Lopes, J., Henriques, A., Nogueira, P., & Alarcão, V. (2021). Effectiveness of social prescribing programs in the primary health-care context: a systematic literature review. Sustainability, 13(5), 2731. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052731
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coughlan, M., Cronin, P., & Ryan, F. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research. British Journal of Nursing (Mark Allen Publishing), 16(11), 658–663. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2007.16.11.23681
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Crowhurst, I., & Kennedy-Macfoy, M. (2013). Troubling gatekeepers: Methodological considerations for social research (pp. 457–462). Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, D., Hannon, S., & Brady, V. (2019). Motivators and challenges to research recruitment–a qualitative study with midwives. Midwifery, 74, 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2019.03.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Farias, B. G., Dutra-Thomé, L., Koller, S. H., & de Castro, T. G. (2021). Formulation of themes in qualitative research: Logical procedures and analytical paths. Trends in Psychology, 29(1), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-020-00052-0
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health (DoH). (2012). Attributing the Costs of Health and Social Care Research & Development (AcoRD). Department of Health.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, R. (2013). Power and trust: An academic researcher’s perspective on working with interpreters as gatekeepers. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 16(6), 503–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2013.823276
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Francis, J. J., Johnston, M., Robertson, C., Glidewell, L., Entwistle, V., Eccles, M. P., & Grimshaw, J. M. (2010). What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies. Psychology & Health, 25(10), 1229–1245. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870440903194015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant, A. (2011). Fear, confusion and participation: Incapacity benefit claimants and (compulsory) work focused interviews. Research, Policy and Planning, 28(3), 161–171.
   Google Scholar
• Haley, S. J., Southwick, L. E., Parikh, N. S., Rivera, J., Farrar-Edwards, D., & Boden-Albala, B. (2017). Barriers and strategies for recruitment of racial and ethnic minorities: perspectives from neurological clinical research coordinators. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 4(6), 1225–1236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-016-0332-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hallsworth, K., Dombrowski, S. U., McPherson, S., Anstee, Q. M., & Avery, L. (2020). Using the theoretical domains framework to identify barriers and enabling factors to implementation of guidance for the diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a qualitative study. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 10(4), 1016–1030. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibz080
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halpern, S. D. (2011). Financial incentives for research participation: Empirical questions, available answers and the burden of further proof. The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, 342(4), 290–293. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAJ.0b013e3182297925
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hennink, M., & Kaiser, B. N. (2022). Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 292, 114523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaacs, T., Murdoch, J., Demjén, Z., & Stevenson, F. (2022). Examining the language demands of informed consent documents in patient recruitment to cancer trials using tools from corpus and computational linguistics. Health (London, England: 1997), 26(4), 431–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363459320963431
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janesick, V., & Peer, D. (2015). The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Kannan, V., Wilkinson, K. E., Varghese, M., Lynch-Medick, S., Willett, D. L., Bosler, T. A., Chu, L., Gates, S. I., Holbein, M. E. B., Willett, M. M., Reimold, S. C., & Toto, R. D. (2019). Count me in: using a patient portal to minimize implicit bias in clinical research recruitment. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association: JAMIA, 26(8–9), 703–713. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiely, B., Croke, A., O’Shea, M., Boland, F., O’Shea, E., Connolly, D., & Smith, S. M. (2022). Effect of social prescribing link workers on health outcomes and costs for adults in primary care and community settings: A systematic review. BMJ Open, 12(10), e062951. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-062951
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraft, S. A., Constantine, M., Magnus, D., Porter, K. M., Lee, S. S.-J., Green, M., Kass, N. E., Wilfond, B. S., & Cho, M. K. (2017). A randomized study of multimedia informational aids for research on medical practices: Implications for informed consent. Clinical Trials (London, England), 14(1), 94–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774516669352
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFadyen, J., & Rankin, J. (2016). The role of gatekeepers in research: Learning from reflexivity and reflection. GSTF Journal of Nursing and Health Care (JNHC), 4(1).
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, P. (1997). Paying people to participate in research: Why not? Bioethics, 11(5), 390–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8519.00079
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Namageyo-Funa, A., Rimando, M., Brace, A., Christiana, R., Fowles, T., Davis, T., Martinez, L., & Sealy, D.-A. (2014). Recruitment in qualitative public health research: Lessons learned during dissertation sample recruitment. The Qualitative Report, 19(4), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2014.1282
   Google Scholar
• Natale, P., Saglimbene, V., Ruospo, M., Gonzalez, A. M., Strippoli, G. F., Scholes-Robertson, N., Guha, C., Craig, J. C., Teixeira-Pinto, A., Snelling, T., & Tong, A. (2021). Transparency, trust and minimizing burden to increase recruitment and retention in trials: A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 134, 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.01.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIFHAC). (2022). Payment guidance for researchers and professionals. NIFHAC.
   Google Scholar
• Negrin, K. A., Slaughter, S. E., Dahlke, S., & Olson, J. (2022). Successful recruitment to qualitative research: A critical reflection. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, 160940692211195. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221119576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newington, L., & Metcalfe, A. (2014). Factors influencing recruitment to research: qualitative study of the experiences and perceptions of research teams. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 14(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-10
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• NHS England. (2023). Workforce development framework: Social prescribing link workers. NHS England. [cited 2024 26/03/2024]. Available from: https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/workforce-development-framework-social-prescribing-link-workers/.
   Google Scholar
• NHS lnu. (2022, November 9). Online version of the NHS long term plan 2022. https://www.longtermplan.nhs.uk/online-version/.
   Google Scholar
• Patel, M. X., Doku, V., & Tennakoon, L. (2003). Challenges in recruitment of research participants. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 9(3), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1192/apt.9.3.229
   Google Scholar
• Perez, D., Murphy, G., Wilkes, L., & Peters, K. (2022). One size does not fit all–overcoming barriers to participant recruitment in qualitative research. Nurse Researcher, 30(1), 24–30. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.2022.e1815
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters, P., Smith, A., Funk, Y., & Boyages, J. (2016). Language, terminology and the readability of online cancer information. Medical Humanities, 42(1), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1136/medhum-2015-010766
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. (2015). Bioethical issues in providing financial incentives to research participants. Medicolegal and Bioethics, 5, 35–41. https://doi.org/10.2147/MB.S70416
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ridge, D., Bullock, L., Causer, H., Fisher, T., Hider, S., Kingstone, T., Gray, L., Riley, R., Smyth, N., Silverwood, V., Spiers, J., & Southam, J. (2023). ‘Imposter participants’ in online qualitative research, a new and increasing threat to data integrity? Health Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 26(3), 941–944. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13724
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, D., & Kalathil, J. (2019). Power, privilege and knowledge: The untenable promise of co-production in mental “health. Frontiers in Sociology, 4, 57. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2019.00057
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ryan, F., Coughlan, M., & Cronin, P. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 2: Qualitative research. British Journal of Nursing (Mark Allen Publishing), 16(12), 738–744. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2007.16.12.23726
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sheridan, R., Martin-Kerry, J., Hudson, J., Parker, A., Bower, P., & Knapp, P. (2020). Why do patients take part in research? An overview of systematic reviews of psychosocial barriers and facilitators. Trials, 21(1), 840. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04793-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spall, S. (1998). Peer debriefing in qualitative research: Emerging operational models. Qualitative Inquiry, 4(2), 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780049800400208
   Google Scholar
• Tierney, S., Wong, G., Roberts, N., Boylan, A.-M., Park, S., Abrams, R., Reeve, J., Williams, V., & Mahtani, K. R. (2020). Supporting social prescribing in primary care by linking people to local assets: a realist review. BMC Medicine, 18(1), 49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-1510-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treweek, S., Pitkethly, M., Cook, J., Fraser, C., Mitchell, E., Sullivan, F., Jackson, C., Taskila, T. K., & Gardner, H. (2018). Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2018(2), 1465–1858. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub6
   Google Scholar
• Vallotton, M. B. (2010). Council for international organizations of medical sciences perspectives: Protecting persons through international ethics guidelines. International Journal of Integrated Care, 10 Suppl(Suppl), e008. https://doi.org/10.5334/ijic.478
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van Epps, H., Astudillo, O., Martin, Y. D. P., & Marsh, J. (2022). The Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines: Implementation and checklist development. European Science Editing, 48, e86910. https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2022.e86910
   Google Scholar
• Wakefield, J. R. H., Kellezi, B., Stevenson, C., McNamara, N., Bowe, M., Wilson, I., Halder, M. M., & Mair, E. (2022). Social Prescribing as ‘Social Cure’: A longitudinal study of the health benefits of social connectedness within a Social Prescribing pathway. Journal of Health Psychology, 27(2), 386–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105320944991
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallerstein, N., Muhammad, M., Sanchez-Youngman, S., Rodriguez Espinosa, P., Avila, M., Baker, E. A., Barnett, S., Belone, L., Golub, M., Lucero, J., Mahdi, I., Noyes, E., Nguyen, T., Roubideaux, Y., Sigo, R., & Duran, B. (2019). Power dynamics in community-based participatory research: A multiple–case study analysis of partnering contexts, histories, and practices. Health Education & Behavior: The Official Publication of the Society for Public Health Education, 46(1_suppl), 19S–32S. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198119852998
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Webber-Ritchey, K. J., Aquino, E., Ponder, T. N., Lattner, C., Soco, C., Spurlark, R., & Simonovich, S. D. (2021). Recruitment strategies to optimize participation by diverse populations. Nursing Science Quarterly, 34(3), 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/08943184211010471
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, S. (2020). ‘Hard to reach’parents but not hard to research: A critical reflection of gatekeeper positionality using a community-based methodology. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(5), 461–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2019.1626819
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, M.-J., Zhao, K., & Fils-Aime, F. (2022). Response rates of online surveys in published research: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 7, 100206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100206
   Google Scholar
• Yamada, J., Potestio, M. L., Cave, A. J., Sharpe, H., Johnson, D. W., Patey, A. M., Presseau, J., & Grimshaw, J. M. (2018). Using the theoretical domains framework to identify barriers and enablers to pediatric asthma management in primary care settings. The Journal of Asthma: official Journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma, 55(11), 1223–1236. https://doi.org/10.1080/02770903.2017.1408820
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zutlevics, T. (2016). Could providing financial incentives to research participants be ultimately self-defeating? Research Ethics, 12(3), 137–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016115626756
   Google Scholar