Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28680275›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2017

Linkage of clinical trial and administrative data: a survey of cancer patient preferences.

A E Hay, Y W Leung, J L Pater, M C Brown, E Bell, D Howell, Z Kassam, S Willing, C Tian, G Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Improving the efficiency of clinical trials in multiple sclerosis.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

A E HayCanadian Cancer Trials Group and.
Y W LeungDepartment of Supportive Care, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre.
J L PaterCanadian Cancer Trials Group and.
M C BrownUniversity Hospital Network, and.
E BellClinical Trials Ontario, Toronto.
D HowellUniversity Hospital Network, and.
Z KassamUniversity Hospital Network, and.
S WillingCancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, ON.
C TianUniversity Hospital Network, and.
G LiuUniversity Hospital Network, and.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPersonal health information, including diagnoses and hospital admissions, is routinely collected in administrative databases. Patients enrolling on clinical trials consent to separate collection and storage of their personal health information. We evaluated patient preferences for linking long-term data from administrative databases with clinical trials.

methodsAdults with cancer attending outpatient clinics at 3 Ontario hospitals were surveyed about their willingness, when faced with the hypothetical scenario of participating in a clinical trial, to provide potentially identifying information such as initials and date of birth to facilitate long-term research access to normally deidentified publicly collected databases.

resultsOf 569 patients surveyed, 335 (59%) were women, 452 (79%) were white, 385 (68%) had a post-secondary education, and 386 (68%) had never participated in a clinical trial. Median age in the group was 59 years. Most participants (93%, cohort 1) would allow long-term access to their information and allow personal information to be used to match clinical trial with administrative data. At the time of clinical trial closure, two thirds of participants (68%, cohort 2) preferred to make additional clinical information available through linkage with administrative databases, and 8 (9%) preferred to have no further information made available to researchers. No significant differences were found in the subset of patients who were part of a clinical trial and those who had never participated (

interpretationAlmost all patients would allow a clinical trial research team to access their confidential information, providing a more comprehensive assessment of an intervention's long-term risks and benefits.

Indexed as

clinical trialsconsentdata linkageSurvey

Identifiers

PMID28680275
PMCPMC5486380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.