Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30364638›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2018

Patient navigation and clinical trial participation: A randomized controlled trial design.

Melissa Kurtz Uveges, Dina George Lansey, Olive Mbah, Tamryn Gray, Lisa Sherden, Jennifer Wenzel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Innovative Strategies for Developing Biomarker-Informed Cancer Clinical Trials to Accelerate Progress in Precision Oncology in Sub-Saharan Africa.American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Melissa Kurtz UvegesHarvard Medical School, Center for Bioethics, 641 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Dina George LanseyDepartment of Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 1600 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Olive MbahThe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, School of Public Health, 135 Dauer Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA.
Tamryn GrayDana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
Lisa SherdenDepartment of Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 1600 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.
Jennifer WenzelDepartment of Acute and Chronic Care, Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, 525 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo our knowledge, no published studies utilizing a randomized controlled design have examined the efficacy of patient navigation for improving clinical trial enrollment.

methodsThis patient navigation and clinical trial participation study is a randomized controlled trial to assess the effect of a patient navigator on enrollment into therapeutic cancer clinical trials. Participants are randomly assigned to high intensity, patient navigator-delivered patient educational materials (PEM) and needs assessment vs. low intensity patient navigation (patient navigator-delivered patient educational materials [PEM] alone). Discussion: Effective enrollment strategies may include utilization of patient navigators as away to meet individual needs, barriers, and concerns of participants enrolled in clinical trials.

Indexed as

Cancer clinical trialsDecision makingPatient navigation

Identifiers

PMID30364638
PMCPMC6197623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.