Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30820925›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2020

How Cancer Patients Perceive Clinical Trials (CTs) in the Era of CTs: Current Perception and Its Differences Between Common and Rare Cancers.

Ji Hyun Park, Ji Sung Lee, HaYeong Koo, Jeong Eun Kim, Jin-Hee Ahn, Min-Hee Ryu, Sook-Ryun Park, Shin-Kyo Yoon, Jae Cheol Lee, Yong-Sang Hong and 8 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

18 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ji Hyun ParkDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Ji Sung LeeClinical Research Center, Asan Institute of Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
HaYeong KooClinical Research Center, Asan Institute of Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.
Jeong Eun KimDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Jin-Hee AhnDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Min-Hee RyuDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Sook-Ryun ParkDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Shin-Kyo YoonDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Jae Cheol LeeDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Yong-Sang HongDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Sun Young KimDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Kyo-Pyo KimDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Chang-Hoon YooDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Jung Yong HongDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Jae Lyun LeeDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Kyung Hae JungDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Baek-Yeol RhyooDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea.
Tae Won KimDepartments of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, South Korea. twkimmd@amc.seoul.kr.
Asan Medical Center · KRUlsan College · KRUniversity of Ulsan · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perception has recently been highlighted as a critical determinant for participation in clinical trials (CTs) among cancer patients. We evaluated cancer patients' current perceptions of CTs using the PARTAKE questionnaires, focusing on differences between patients with common and rare cancers. From November 2015 to May 2017, we prospectively surveyed patients who had received anti-cancer treatment at Asan Medical Center. Among 333 respondents, 70.9% had common and 29.1% had rare cancers. In the cohort, 87.7% of patients with common cancers and 75.3% of patients with rare cancers answered that they heard of and knew about CTs. However, willingness to participate in CTs was expressed only in approximately 56% of patients, although it was significantly associated with awareness and perception. Surprisingly, patients with rare cancers when compared with patients with common cancers showed significantly lower levels of awareness and perception (64.2% vs 79.9%, p = 0.003 and 77.3% vs 91.9%, p < 0.001), and consequently less willingness to participate in CTs (47.4% vs 58.9%, p = 0.06). In addition, cancer patients still harbored fear and concerns about safety and reward of CTs, and demonstrated substantial lack of knowledge about the voluntary nature of CTs, which was more obvious in patients with rare cancers. We identified relatively modest willingness of cancer patients to participate in CTs regardless of generally favorable perception. These findings are highlighted by the more negative perception of CTs among patients with rare cancers relative to those with common cancers. Further education and encouragement by research and public entities seem essential to improve motivation of CTs in cancer patients beyond good perception, especially for patients with rare cancers.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultAgedClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivationNeoplasmsPatient ParticipationPerceptionRare DiseasesSurveys and QuestionnairesClinical trialCommon cancerCurrent perceptionDifferenceRare cancer

Identifiers

PMID30820925
OpenAlexW2898361067

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.