Retrospective study assesses recruitment strategies and outcomes for dementia research in Peru, suggesting community trust enhances engagement.
Background Recruitment for Alzheimer's disease and related dementias research remains challenging, particularly when reaching underrepresented groups such as Latin Americans. Objective This study aimed to (1) assess recruitment rates across strategies in the ReDLat study and (2) discuss lessons learned to inform future recruitment practices. Methods This retrospective study outlines the recruitment for ReDLat, a multi-partner consortium expanding dementia research in Latin America. Participants were recruited using: printed flyers, social media, word-of-mouth, and professional referrals. At initial contact, participants were asked how they learned about the study. Enrollment rates were calculated for each source, and differences across sources were examined using a Pearson chi-square test. Results Between January 2023 and March 2025, 577 individuals expressed interest, of whom 69% (n = 397) were enrolled. Enrollment rates differed significantly across sources (χ 2 (3) = 41.66, p < 0.001); professional referrals achieved a substantially higher rate (81%) than printed flyers (51%), social media (55%), and word-of-mouth (60%), which showed broadly comparable rates. Printed flyers and social media generated broad interest but lower enrollment conversion. Among the 180 individuals not enrolled, the most frequent reason for non-participation was failure to meet inclusion criteria (54%), particularly among those reached via social media and word-of-mouth. Loss of contact accounted for 36% of non-participation. Conclusions Professional referrals were associated with the highest enrollment rate for the ReDLat study. These findings highlight the importance of leveraging community trust and professional networks to improve recruitment outcomes for dementia research in underrepresented populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Custodio et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: