Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2008
How do patients want to learn of results of clinical trials? A survey of 1431 breast cancer patients.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Training Africans to Lead and Execute Neurological Trials and Studies (TALENTS): program overview and rationale.Equity neuroscience · 2025Article
- Return of individual genomic research results within the PRAEGNANT multicenter registry study.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2023Article
- The relative importance of information items and preferred mode of delivery when disseminating results from trials to participants: A mixed-methods study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Article
- Providing trial results to participants in phase III pragmatic effectiveness RCTs: a scoping review.Trials · 2021Article
- Participant preferences for the provision of registration trials results.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2013Article
- Feedback of trial results to participants: a survey of clinicians' and patients' attitudes and experiences.European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Questionnaires were circulated to UK patients and health care professionals (HCPs) participating in the Taxotere as Adjuvant ChemoTherapy (TACT) trial in autumn 2004 asking if and how trial results, when available, should be conveyed to patients. A total of 1431 (37% of surviving UK TACT patients) returned questionnaires. In all, 30 (2%) patients did not want results. In all, 554 (40%) patients preferred to receive them via their hospital; 664 (47%) preferred results posted directly to their home, 177 (13%) preferred a letter providing a telephone number to request results. Six hundred and twelve patients thought results should come directly from the trials office. One hundred and seventy-six HCPs from 89 UK centres (86%) returned questionnaires. In all, 169 out of 176 patients (96%) thought results should be written in lay terms for patients. Seventy (41%) preferred patients to receive results via their hospital; 64 (38%) preferred a letter providing a telephone number to request results, and 32 (19%) preferred results posted directly to patients. Thirty-one HCPs (18%) thought results to patients should come directly from the trials office. A total of 868 (61%) patients thought next of kin of deceased patients should receive results, 543 (38%) did not; 47 (27%) HCPs thought they should; 118 (68%) did not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.