1. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346(9):e7586. doi:10.1136/bmj.e7586
2. Kim ES, Bruinooge SS, Roberts S, et al. Broadening eligibility criteria to make clinical trials more representative: American society of clinical oncology and friends of cancer research joint research statement. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(33):3737-3744. doi:10.1200/JCO.2017.73.7916
3. Treweek S, Zwarenstein M. Making trials matter: Pragmatic and explanatory trials and the problem of applicability. Trials. 2009;10(1):37. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-10-37
4. Simpson F, Sweetman EA, Doig GS. A systematic review of techniques and interventions for improving adherence to inclusion and exclusion criteria during enrolment into randomised controlled trials. Trials. 2010;11. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-11-17
5. Yelland LN, Kahan BC, Dent E, et al. Prevalence and reporting of recruitment, randomisation and treatment errors in clinical trials: A systematic review. Clin Trials. April 2018:174077451876162. doi:10.1177/1740774518761627
6. Vining RD, Salsbury SA, Pohlman KA. Eligibility determination for clinical trials: Development of a case review process at a chiropractic research center. Trials. 2014;15(1). doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-406
7. Rehman AM, Ferrand R, Allen E, Simms V, McHugh G, Weiss HA. Exclusion of enrolled participants in randomised controlled trials: what to do with ineligible participants? BMJ Open. 2020;10(12):e039546. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039546
8. Yelland LN, Sullivan TR, Voysey M, Lee KJ, Cook JA, Forbes AB. Applying the intention-to-treat principle in practice: Guidance on handling randomisation errors. Clin Trials. 2015;12(4):418-423. doi:10.1177/1740774515588097
9. Lösch C, Neuhäuser M. The statistical analysis of a clinical trial when a protocol amendment changed the inclusion criteria. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-8-16
10. He J, Morales DR, Guthrie B. Exclusion rates in randomized controlled trials of treatments for physical conditions: A systematic review. Trials. 2020;21(1):228. doi:10.1186/s13063-020-4139-0
11. King NMP. Defining and Describing Benefit Appropriately in Clinical Trials. J Law, Med Ethics. 2000;28(4):332-343. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2000.tb00685.x
12. Benefits of taking part in research - Participating in research - Understanding dementia research - Research - Alzheimer Europe. https://www.alzheimer-europe.org/Research/Understanding-dementia-research/Participating-in-research/Benefits-of-taking-part-in-research. Accessed July 15, 2020.
13. Witham MD, Anderson E, Carroll CB, et al. Ensuring that COVID-19 research is inclusive: guidance from the NIHR INCLUDE project. BMJ Open. 2020;10(11):e043634. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043634
14. Hilgers RD, Manolov M, Heussen N, Rosenberger WF. Design and analysis of stratified clinical trials in the presence of bias. Stat Methods Med Res. 2020;29(6):1715-1727. doi:10.1177/0962280219846146
15. George SL. Reducing patient eligibility criteria in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(4):1364-1370. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8648395. Accessed September 20, 2016.
16. Buyse ME. The case of loose inclusion criteria in clinical trials. Acta Chir Belg. 90(3):129-131. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2375213. Accessed October 18, 2016.
17. Yusuf S, Held P, Teo KK, Toretsky ER. Selection of patients for randomized controlled trials: Implications of wide or narrow eligibility criteria. Stat Med. 1990;9(1-2):73-86. doi:10.1002/sim.4780090114
18. Zhang S, Liang F, Li W, Tannock I. Comparison of Eligibility Criteria Between Protocols, Registries, and Publications of Cancer Clinical Trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108(11):djw129. doi:10.1093/jnci/djw129
19. Gandhi M, Ameli N, Bacchetti P, et al. Eligibility criteria for HIV clinical trials and generalizability of results: The gap between published reports and study protocols. AIDS. 2005;19(16):1885-1896. doi:10.1097/01.aids.0000189866.67182.f7
20. Blümle A, Meerpohl JJ, Rücker G, Antes G, Schumacher M, Von Elm E. Reporting of eligibility criteria of randomised trials: Cohort study comparing trial protocols with subsequent articles. BMJ. 2011;342(7805). doi:10.1136/bmj.d1828
21. Getz KA, Zuckerman R, Cropp AB, Hindle AL, Krauss R, Kaitin KI. Measuring the Incidence, Causes, and Repercussions of Protocol Amendments. Drug Inf J. 2011;45(3):265-275. doi:10.1177/009286151104500307
22. Willoughby C, Fridsma D, Chatterjee L, Speakman J, Evans J, Kush R. A Standard Computable Clinical Trial Protocol: The Role of the BRIDG Model. Drug Inf J. 2007;41(3):383-392. doi:10.1177/009286150704100312
23. Stenning SP, Cragg WJ, Joffe N, et al. Triggered or routine site monitoring visits for randomised controlled trials: results of TEMPER, a prospective, matched-pair study. Clin Trials. August 2018:174077451879337. doi:10.1177/1740774518793379
24. Brosteanu O, Schwarz G, Houben P, et al. Risk-adapted monitoring is not inferior to extensive on-site monitoring: Results of the ADAMON cluster-randomised study. Clin Trials. 2017;14. doi:10.1177/1740774517724165
25. Wyman Engen N, Huppler Hullsiek K, Belloso WH, et al. A randomized evaluation of on-site monitoring nested in a multinational randomized trial. Clin Trials. October 2019:174077451988161. doi:10.1177/1740774519881616
26. Statler A, Othus M, Erba HP, et al. Comparable outcomes of patients eligible vs ineligible for SWOG leukemia studies. Blood. 2018;131(25):2782-2788. doi:10.1182/blood-2018-01-826693
27. Spragg RG, Masys DR, Sergeant D, Lawrie T, Taut FJH. An informatics strategy to assure enrollment criteria compliance in studies of the critically ill. Contemp Clin Trials. 2010;31(6):530-535. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2010.07.006
28. Sweetman EA, Doig GS. Failure to report protocol violations in clinical trials: a threat to internal validity? Trials. 2011;12:214. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-12-214
29. Meeker-O’Connell A, Glessner C, Behm M, et al. Enhancing clinical evidence by proactively building quality into clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2016;13(4):439-444. http://ctj.sagepub.com/content/13/4/439.abstract.
30. MHRA. Good Clinical Practice Guide. Stationery Office; 2012.
31. Jisc. Online surveys. https://www.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/. Accessed August 10, 2021.
32. Brown SR, Sherratt D, Booth G, et al. Experiences of establishing an academic early phase clinical trials unit. Clin Trials. May 2017:174077451771025. doi:10.1177/1740774517710250
33. Health Research Authority. Informing participants and seeking consent - Health Research Authority. https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/best-practice/informing-participants-and-seeking-consent/. Accessed March 3, 2021.
34. Health Research Authority. Do I need NHS Ethics approval? http://www.hra-decisiontools.org.uk/ethics/index.html. Accessed July 3, 2018.
35. Sharma A, Minh Duc NT, Luu Lam Thang T, et al. A Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS). J Gen Intern Med 2021. April 2021:1-9. doi:10.1007/S11606-021-06737-1
36. Ross J, Tu S, Carini S, Sim I. Analysis of eligibility criteria complexity in clinical trials. Summit on Translat Bioinforma. 2010;2010:46-50. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21347148. Accessed February 26, 2021.
37. Jin S, Pazdur R, Sridhara R. Re-evaluating eligibility criteria for oncology clinical trials: Analysis of investigational new drug applications in 2015. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(33):3745-3752. doi:10.1200/JCO.2017.73.4186
38. Ivie RMJ, Vail EA, Wunsch H, Goldklang MP, Fowler R, Moitra VK. Patient eligibility for randomized controlled trials in critical care medicine: An international two-center observational study. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(2):216-224. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002061
39. Chen X, Schaufelberger M, Fu M. The eligible population of the PARADIGM-HF trial in a real-world outpatient clinic and its cardiovascular risk between 2005 and 2016. J Cardiovasc Med. 2020;21(1):6-12. doi:10.2459/JCM.0000000000000889
40. Ayaz-Shah AA, Hussain S, Knight SR. Do clinical trials reflect reality? A systematic review of inclusion/exclusion criteria in trials of renal transplant immunosuppression. Transpl Int. 2018;31(4):353-360. doi:10.1111/tri.13109
41. Zimmerman M, Balling C, Chelminski I, Dalrymple K. Have treatment studies of depression become even less generalizable applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria in placebo-controlled antidepressant efficacy trials published over 20 years to a clinical sample. Psychother Psychosom. 2019;88(3):165-170. doi:10.1159/000499917
42. Du Vaure CB, Dechartres A, Battin C, Ravaud P, Boutron I. Exclusion of patients with concomitant chronic conditions in ongoing randomised controlled trials targeting 10 common chronic conditions and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: A systematic review of registration details. BMJ Open. 2016;6(9). doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012265
43. Begg CB, Engstrom PF. Eligibility and extrapolation in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5(6):962-968. doi:10.1200/JCO.1987.5.6.962
44. Donovan JL, Paramasivan S, de Salis I, Toerien M. Clear obstacles and hidden challenges: understanding recruiter perspectives in six pragmatic randomised controlled trials. Trials. 2014;15(1):5. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-5
45. Ugalde A, Kiss N, Livingston PM, Rankin N. Commentary on ‘Exclusion rates in randomized trials of treatments for physical conditions: a systematic review.’ Trials. 2021;22(1):76. doi:10.1186/s13063-021-05019-9
46. Printz C. The number of patients with lung cancer eligible for a clinical trial could double with broader enrollment criteria. Cancer. 2019;125(22):3907. doi:10.1002/cncr.32589
47. Briel M, Speich B, von Elm E, Gloy V. Comparison of randomized controlled trials discontinued or revised for poor recruitment and completed trials with the same research question: a matched qualitative study. Trials. 2019;20(1):800. doi:10.1186/s13063-019-3957-4
48. Duley L, Gillman A, Duggan M, et al. What are the main inefficiencies in trial conduct: a survey of UKCRC registered clinical trials units in the UK. Trials. 2018;19(1):15. doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2378-5
49. Carlisle B, Kimmelman J, Ramsay T, MacKinnon N. Unsuccessful trial accrual and human subjects protections: An empirical analysis of recently closed trials. Clin Trials. 2015;12(1):77-83. doi:10.1177/1740774514558307
50. Walters SJ, Bonacho dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby I, Bortolami O, et al. Recruitment and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials funded and published by the United Kingdom Health Technology Assessment Programme. BMJ Open. 2017;7(3):e015276. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015276
51. Schmidt AF, Groenwold RHH, Van Delden JJM, et al. Justification of exclusion criteria was underreported in a review of cardiovascular trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(6):635-644. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.12.005
52. Van Spall HGC, Toren A, Kiss A, Fowler RA. Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high-impact general medical journals: A systematic sampling review. J Am Med Assoc. 2007;297(11):1233-1240. doi:10.1001/jama.297.11.1233
53. US Food and Drug Administration. Public Workshop: Evaluating Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria in Clinical Trials IN CLINICAL TRIALS.; 2018. https://www.fda.gov/media/134754/download. Accessed February 26, 2021.
54. Weijer C, Freedman B, Shapiro S, Fuks A, Skrutkowska M, Sigurjonsdottir M. Assessing the interpretation of criteria for clinical trial eligibility: a survey of oncology investigators. Clin Invest Med. 1998;21(1):17-26.
55. Wilson C, Rooshenas L, Paramasivan S, et al. Development of a framework to improve the process of recruitment to randomised controlled trials (RCTs): the SEAR (Screened, Eligible, Approached, Randomised) framework. Trials. 2018;19(1):50. doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2413-6
56. Crocker JC, Ricci-Cabello I, Parker A, et al. Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2018;363:k4738. doi:10.1136/BMJ.K4738
57. Price A, Albarqouni L, Kirkpatrick J, et al. Patient and public involvement in the design of clinical trials: An overview of systematic reviews. J Eval Clin Pract. 2018;24(1):240-253. doi:10.1111/jep.12805
58. Clinical Trials Toolkit - Glossary. https://www.ct-toolkit.ac.uk/glossary/?letter=T&postcategory=-1. Accessed February 24, 2021.
59. Vax Report - Researchers establish new enrollment criteria for African volunteers. https://www.vaxreport.org/vax-5-8-august-2007/677-researchers-establish-new-enrollment-criteria-for-african-volunteers. Accessed March 1, 2021.
60. Bechtel J, Chuck T, Forrest A, et al. Improving the quality conduct and efficiency of clinical trials with training: Recommendations for preparedness and qualification of investigators and delegates. Contemp Clin Trials. 2020;89. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2019.105918
61. What approvals and decisions do I need? - Health Research Authority. https://www.hra.nhs.uk/approvals-amendments/what-approvals-do-i-need/. Accessed February 24, 2021.
62. Bhattacharya S, Cantor MN. Analysis of eligibility criteria representation in industry-standard clinical trial protocols. J Biomed Inform. 2013;46(5):805-813. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2013.06.001
63. Chondrogiannis E, Andronikou V, Tagaris A, Karanastasis E, Varvarigou T, Tsuji M. A novel semantic representation for eligibility criteria in clinical trials. J Biomed Inform. 2017;69:10-23. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2017.03.013
64. Weng C, Tu SW, Sim I, Richesson R. Formal representation of eligibility criteria: A literature review. J Biomed Inform. 2010;43(3):451-467. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2009.12.004
65. Gulden C, Landerer I, Nassirian A, Altun FB, Andrae J. Extraction and Prevalence of Structured Data Elements in Free-Text Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria. Stud Heal Technol Inf. 2019;258:226-230.
66. Sumi E, Teramukai S, Yamamoto K, Satoh M, Yamanaka K, Yokode M. The correlation between the number of eligible patients in routine clinical practice and the low recruitment level in clinical trials: a retrospective study using electronic medical records. Trials. 2013;14:426. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-14-426
67. Milian K, Hoekstra R, Bucur A, ten Teije A, van Harmelen F, Paulissen J. Enhancing reuse of structured eligibility criteria and supporting their relaxation. J Biomed Inform. 2015;56:205-219. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2015.05.005
68. Minnerup J, Trinczek B, Storck M, et al. Feasibility platform for stroke studies: An online tool to improve eligibility criteria for clinical trials. Stroke. 2015;46(1):137-142. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.007124
69. Wang AY, Lancaster WJ, Wyatt MC, Rasmussen L V, Fort DG, Cimino JJ. Classifying Clinical Trial Eligibility Criteria to Facilitate Phased Cohort Identification Using Clinical Data Repositories. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2018:1754-1763.
70. Köpcke F, Trinczek B, Majeed RW, et al. Evaluation of data completeness in the electronic health record for the purpose of patient recruitment into clinical trials: A retrospective analysis of element presence. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13(1). doi:10.1186/1472-6947-13-37
71. Melzer G, Maiwald T, Prokosch HU, Ganslandt T. Leveraging Real-World Data for the Selection of Relevant Eligibility Criteria for the Implementation of Electronic Recruitment Support in Clinical Trials. Appl Clin Inform. 2021;12(1):17-26. doi:10.1055/s-0040-1721010
72. Roos DE, Davis SR, O’Brien PC, et al. Eligibility audits for the randomized neuropathic bone pain trial (TROG 96.05). Australas Radiol. 2000;44(3):303-307. doi:10.1046/j.1440-1673.2000.00818.x
73. Boland MR, Tu SW, Carini S, Sim I, Weng C. EliXR-TIME: A Temporal Knowledge Representation for Clinical Research Eligibility Criteria. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci proceedings AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci. 2012;2012:71-80. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22779055. Accessed March 1, 2021.
74. Luo Z, Johnson SB, Lai AM, Weng C. Extracting temporal constraints from clinical research eligibility criteria using conditional random fields. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2011:843-852.
75. Health Research Authority. Protocol - Health Research Authority. https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/research-planning/protocol/. Accessed March 2, 2021.
76. National Institutes of Health. Protocol Templates for Clinical Trials | grants.nih.gov. https://grants.nih.gov/policy/clinical-trials/protocol-template.htm. Accessed March 2, 2021.
77. SPIRIT Group. SPIRIT Electronic Protocol Tool & Resource (SEPTRE). https://www.spirit-statement.org/trial-protocol-template/. Accessed March 2, 2021.
78. Gennari JH, Weng C, McDonald DW, Benedetti J, Green S. An ethnographic study of collaborative clinical trial protocol writing. Stud Heal Technol Inf. 2004;107(Pt2):1461-1465.