Long-term Real-World Evidence (RWE) studies face significant challenges when it comes to patient retention, for several reasons:
[1] Time Commitment: Participants in RWE studies are often required to participate over extended periods, sometimes even years. This long-term commitment may lead to decreased interest and attrition over time, especially if the participants do not see immediate benefits from their participation.
[2] Life Changes: Given the long-term nature of RWE studies, life events such as changes in health status, relocation, changes in personal or financial circumstances, or simply a change in priorities can influence a participant’s ability or desire to continue in the study.
[3] Perceived Burden: Depending on the design of the study, the level of participant engagement required can vary widely. Some RWE studies may require frequent hospital visits, self-reporting of data, regular lab tests, or other potentially time-consuming activities. The perceived burden of these requirements can negatively impact retention.
[4] Lack of Engagement: If participants feel that they are just data points and do not feel personally engaged or valued, they may be more likely to drop out of the study. Personal engagement strategies, regular communication, and feedback are therefore crucial to keep participants motivated.
[5] Privacy and Data Security Concerns: In the era of digital health data, participants might worry about the potential misuse of their personal health information, which may lead to dropouts.
[6] Inadequate Understanding: If the participants do not fully understand the importance of their role, the relevance of the research, or the potential benefits to them or to society, they may be less likely to continue in the study. Education and clear communication are key to ensuring participants understand these aspects.
To address these challenges, researchers are increasingly looking to use technologies and strategies that can improve the participant experience and maintain engagement over time, such as remote monitoring technologies, digital health platforms, personalized engagement strategies, and clear, ongoing communication about the value and impact of the study.
Share this story...
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Registry vs Registry-Based Study
RWE 101 - Registry vs Registry-Based Study In the context of real-world evidence, a registry is a collection of data on a particular disease, medical condition, or [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Pregnancy Registries
RWE 101 - Pregnancy Registries A pregnancy registry is a type of real-world evidence collection system that collects data from pregnant women who have been exposed to [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – Diversity
RWE 101 - Diversity Diversity in the context of real-world research refers to the inclusion of individuals from different backgrounds, including but not limited to race, ethnicity, gender, [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – The Patient Voice
RWE 101 - The Patient Voice The patient voice refers to the perspectives, opinions, and experiences of patients and their families or caregivers in the context of [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – ISPE GPP
RWE 101 - ISPE GPP The International Society of Pharmacoepidemiology (ISPE) Good Pharmacoepidemiology Practices (GPP) provides guidance for the conduct and reporting of pharmacoepidemiologic studies. The key [...]
Real World Evidence (RWE) 101 – EMA Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVPs)
RWE 101 - EMA Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVPs) The European Medicines Agency's (EMA) Good Pharmacovigilance Practices (GVPs) provide a framework for the monitoring and reporting of adverse drug [...]







