Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30840157›Full record

ArticleMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2019

Evaluating the decisions of glioma patients regarding clinical trial participation: a retrospective single provider review.

Grant W Jirka, Karl Stessy M Bisselou, Lynette M Smith, Nicole Shonka

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Grant W JirkaCollege of Medicine, 985520 University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198-5520, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5329-9614
Karl Stessy M BisselouDepartment of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, 984375 University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198-4375, USA.
Lynette M SmithDepartment of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, 984375 University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198-4375, USA.
Nicole ShonkaDivision of Hematology & Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198-6840, USA. nshonka@unmc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8182-3409
University of Nebraska Medical Center · US

Funding

UNMC/EPPLEY CANCER CENTER SUPPORT GRANTP30CA036727 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER · PI Apar Kishor Ganti · 1985 to 2026
$55.0M
Fred & Pamela Buffett Cancer Center Support Grant from the National Cancer Institute P30 CA036727
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical trial accrual is vital to advancing care. A single study elucidated demographic data correlating with glioma patients' clinical trial enrollment. However, it did not investigate the underlying decision-making process for non-participation. In this study, we seek to understand this key aspect of patient accrual. All notes for glioma patients seen by a single neuro-oncologist from July 2010 to May 2017 were examined for mention of clinical trial offerings. When a trial was declined, the patient's reasoning was recorded along with the following: diagnosis, KPS, extent of resection, age, gender, race, marital status, income group, religion, trial offered at initial visit versus subsequent, and distance from trial site. Of 279 consecutive glioma patients, 88 were eligible for and offered a clinical trial. Fifty-seven accepted (65%), and 31 (35%) declined participation (Fig. 1). Of those offered a clinical trial, patients with glioblastoma (GBM) were significantly more likely to accept (44 out of 57 (77%) vs. 13 out of 57 (23%), p =0.03). After we adjusted for gender and travel distance, GBM was the only significant predictor of clinical trial acceptance, with an odds ratio of 3.18 (95% CI 1.17, 8.61, p =0.02). Reasons cited for non-participation included: travel distance (39%), lack of interest (39%), visit frequency (16%), and fear of randomization (6%). This study clarified for the first time individual glioma patient rationale for non-participation and potential areas for improving enrollment. Allowing off-site treatment centers or telemedicine visits may entice rural patients to participate. Visit frequency should be carefully considered and minimized whenever possible. Further prospective study of rationale for non-participation may improve enrollment over time.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAdultBrain NeoplasmsClinical Trials as TopicFemaleGliomaHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient ParticipationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRetrospective StudiesAccrualClinical trialEvaluating decisionsGliomaNon-participation

Identifiers

PMID30840157
OpenAlexW2921993697

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.