ArticleTrials2018
Patients' reasoning regarding the decision to participate in clinical cancer trials: an interview study.
Article in Trials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Benefits and Burdens of Research Participation: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review in Palliative and End-of-Life Care.Journal of hospice and palliative nursing : JHPN : the official journal of the Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Factors that impact on recruitment to randomised trials in health care: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Motivations and experiences of patients with respiratory disease and their caregivers in a multinational trial of mirtazapine for severe breathlessness: a qualitative study (BETTER-B).BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Motivation to Consent and Adhere to the FORT Randomized Controlled Trial.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Trial
- Motivations and Decision Making Processes of Men With X-linked Retinoschisis Considering Participation in an Ocular Gene Therapy Trial.American journal of ophthalmology · 2019Trial
- Therapeutic Misconception as a Problem of Nonmaleficence by Way of False Hope.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2026Article
- Understanding recruitment challenges in Swiss oncology trials: Patient voices from focus groups.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2026Article
- Attitudes and Willingness to Participate in Drug Clinical Trials Among Patients With Cancer: Multistage Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Accepting to Participate in an Early-Phase Clinical Trial in Oncology: A Qualitative Study on the Patients' Experiences, Understanding, and Inner Motivations.Psycho-oncology · 2025Article
- How to Support Participants in Urogenital and Prostate Clinical Trials: A Qualitative Perspective.Psycho-oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- "If that would have lessened my symptoms, that would have been great...": a qualitative study about the acceptability of tecovirimat as treatment for mpox.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- A qualitative study on the impact and participation in the AGELESS multidomain intervention: Insights from older adults with cognitive frailty and their caregivers.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Exploring the Decision-Making Process of People Living with HIV Enrolled in Antiretroviral Clinical Trials: A Qualitative Study of Decisions Guided by Trust and Emotions.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2023Article
- Informed consent in cancer clinical drug trials in China: a narrative literature review of the past 20 years.Trials · 2023Review
- Trusting relationships between patients with non-curative cancer and healthcare professionals create ethical obstacles for informed consent in clinical trials: a grounded theory study.BMC palliative care · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical cancer trials are crucial for the implementation of new treatments in the clinical setting, but it is equally crucial that patients are given the opportunity to make a well-informed decision about participation. The inclusion process is complex, including both oral and written information about the trial. The process of patients' decision-making regarding clinical cancer trials has not yet been sufficiently studied. This interview study aims to explore the process of patients' reasoning regarding the decision to participate in a clinical cancer trial.
methodsThe study is based on 27 individual face-to-face interviews with patients who had decided to participate in a clinical cancer trial. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and then analysed using inductive content analysis.
resultsContent analysis revealed 17 subthemes grouped into five themes: (1) an unhesitating decision to participate; (2) a decision based on flimsy grounds and guided by emotion; (3) feeling safe and secure with my decision; (4) faced with a choice versus what choice do I have? and (5) hoping for help while helping others. The decision to participate in a clinical cancer trial was often immediate and guided by emotions, based on a trusting relationship with healthcare personnel rather than on careful reading of written information. Palliative patients, in particular, sometimes had unrealistic beliefs about the effectiveness of the trial treatment.
conclusionsIt is vital that the decision to participate in a clinical cancer trial is preceded by an honest dialogue about possible positive and negative effects of the trial treatments, including other options such as supportive care in the palliative setting. Our findings also raise the questions of how important written information is for the decision-making process and also whether genuine informed consent is possible. To reach a higher degree of informed consent, it is most important that the oral information is given in a thorough and unbiased manner.
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.