4. Kadam, RA, et al. Challenges in recruitment and retention of clinical trial subjects. Perspectives in Clinical Research 2016; 7: 137–143.
5. Dickert, NW, Halpern, SD, Butler, J. Incentivizing recruitment and retention to address enrollment challenges in clinical research. Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes 2013; 6: 367–370.
6. Sibai, T, Carlisle, H, Tornetta, P. The darker side of randomized trials: recruitment challenges. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 2012; 94(Suppl. 1): 49–55.
7. Oude Rengerink, K, et al. IMproving PArticipation of patients in Clinical Trials—rationale and design of IMPACT. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2010; 10: 85.
8. Campbell, MK, et al. Recruitment to randomised trials: strategies for trial enrollment and participation study. The STEPS study. Health Technology Assessment 2007; 11: iii, ix–105.
9. Heller, C, et al. Strategies addressing barriers to clinical trial enrollment of underrepresented populations: a systematic review. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2014; 39: 169–182.
10. Caldwell, PHY, et al. Strategies for increasing recruitment to randomised controlled trials: systematic review. PLoS Medicine. 2010; 7: e1000368.
11. Friedman, DB, et al. How are we communicating about clinical trials? Contemporary Clinical Trials 2014; 38: 275–283.
12. Montalvo, W, Larson, E. Participant comprehension of research for which they volunteer: a systematic review. Journal of Nursing Scholarship 2014; 46(6): 423–431.
13. Zarin, DA, et al. The ClinicalTrials.gov results database—update and key issues. New England Journal of Medicine 2011; 364: 852–860.
14. Zarin, DA, et al. Trial reporting in ClinicalTrials.gov—the final rule. New England Journal of Medicine 2016; 375: 1998–2004.
15. Zarin, DA, Tse, T, Ide, NC. Trial registration at ClinicalTrials.gov between may and october 2005. New England Journal of Medicine 2005; 353(26): 2779–2787.
17. Harris, PA, et al. ResearchMatch: a national registry to recruit volunteers for clinical research. Academic Medicine 2012; 87: 66–73.
19. Rocker, C, et al. Use of an online portal to facilitate clinical trial recruitment: a preliminary analysis of Fox Trial Finder. Journal of Parkinson’s Disease 2015; 5: 55–66.
20. Schultz, PL, et al. Evaluating the use of plain language in a cancer clinical trial website/app. Journal of Cancer Education 2017; 32: 707–713.
21. Abel, GA, et al. Accessibility and quality of online cancer-related clinical trial information for naïve searchers. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention 2015; 24: 1629–1631.
22. Bickmore, TW, et al. Improving access to online health information with conversational agents: a randomized controlled experiment. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2016; 18: e1.
23. Utami, D, et al. Health literacy and usability of clinical trial search engines. Journal of Health Communication 2014; 19(Suppl. 2): 190–204.
24. Ogino, D, Takahashi, K, Sato, H. Characteristics of clinical trial websites: information distribution between ClinicalTrials.gov and 13 primary registries in the WHO registry network. Trials. 2014; 15: 428.
25. Wu, DTY, et al. Assessing the readability of ClinicalTrials.gov. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2016; 23(2): 269–275.
26. Luo, Z, et al. Corpus-based approach to creating a semantic lexicon for clinical research eligibility criteria from UMLS. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science Proceedings 2010; 2010: 26–30.
27. Luo, Z, Johnson, SB, Weng, C. Semi-automatically inducing semantic classes of clinical research eligibility criteria using UMLS and hierarchical clustering. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings 2010; 2010: 487–491.