Recruitment to intellectual disability research: a qualitative study.
Keep the same person, make three warm contacts, and sell the fun or medical payoff to recruit adults with ID.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team talked with helpers who recruit adults with intellectual disability into studies.
They asked what worries the adults, what builds trust, and what makes them say yes.
The goal was to turn those stories into a clear recruitment plan for future ID research.
What they found
Adults feel calmer when the same staff member calls or visits several times.
They join when you mention fun, medical feedback, or helping others like them.
A rushed, one-time letter or phone call almost always fails.
How this fits with other research
Lennox et al. (2005) already showed that extra calls and meetings can modestly boost sign-ups.
Matson et al. (2013) now explains why those calls work: they cut anxiety and build rapport.
Jones et al. (2010) used the same friendly, repeat-interview style to create a care-quality tool.
Together the papers say: treat recruitment like a short therapy relationship, not a single sales pitch.
Why it matters
You can copy the script tomorrow. Pick one staff member to make three warm contacts. Start with a hello visit, share the fun parts, and end with a reminder of the medical feedback they will get. Expect more yes answers and fewer no-shows.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Assign one team member to call each potential participant three times and mention the fun activity or health feedback first.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Difficulties in the recruitment of adults with intellectual disability (ID) to research studies are well described but little studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the difficulties in recruiting to a specific research project, in order to inform future recruitment to ID research. METHODS: Individual semi-structured interviews were held between September 2009 and May 2010 with people who had been involved as intermediaries in recruitment to the research project. These were transcribed verbatim and were independently analysed by two researchers using the Framework approach, who then agreed upon the key emerging themes. RESULTS: Ten interviews were analysed. A number of themes arose, including participant factors (interview anxiety, difficulties in understanding the concept of research, worry about negative feedback), the importance of the researcher (using a personal approach, meeting potential participants prior to recruitment) and motivators [enjoyment of the research interview (participant), obtaining a medical assessment (carer)]. The themes were then used to generate strategies to improve recruitment to ID research: these include the research team applying a more personal approach, developing the recruitment process to allow for multiple meetings with potential participants, and considering motivators for both participants and carers. CONCLUSIONS: This study has used the experiences of intermediaries to identify strategies for improving recruitment to future ID research. This has implications in terms of both time and money. However, successful recruitment is essential to ID research, and we hope that the study will be used by ID researchers to review and improve their recruitment processes.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2013 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2012.01573.x