Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31720002›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2019

A step towards equitable clinical trial recruitment: a protocol for the development and preliminary testing of an online prostate cancer health information and clinical trial matching tool.

Hala T Borno, Brian M Bakke, Celia Kaplan, Anke Hebig-Prophet, Jessica Chao, Yoon-Ji Kim, Jan Yeager, Pelin Cinar, Eric Small, Christy Boscardin and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2019. 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
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  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

11 authors.

Hala T Borno *1Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California at San Francisco, 550 16th Street, 6th Floor, Box 3211, Office 6554, San Francisco, CA 94158 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4357-9759
Brian M Bakke *2School of Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Celia Kaplan *3Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Anke Hebig-Prophet4Clinical Innovation Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Jessica Chao4Clinical Innovation Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Yoon-Ji Kim4Clinical Innovation Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Jan Yeager4Clinical Innovation Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Pelin Cinar1Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California at San Francisco, 550 16th Street, 6th Floor, Box 3211, Office 6554, San Francisco, CA 94158 USA.
Eric Small1Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California at San Francisco, 550 16th Street, 6th Floor, Box 3211, Office 6554, San Francisco, CA 94158 USA.
Christy Boscardin4Clinical Innovation Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Ralph Gonzales4Clinical Innovation Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecruitment of a diverse participant pool to cancer clinical trials is an essential component of clinical research as it improves the generalizability of findings. Investigating and piloting novel recruitment strategies that take advantage of ubiquitous digital technologies has become an important component of facilitating broad recruitment and addressing inequities in clinical trial participation. Equitable and inclusive recruitment improves generalizability of clinical trial outcomes, benefiting patients, clinicians, and the research community. The increasing prevalence of online connectivity in the USA and use of the Internet as a resource for medical information provides an opportunity for digital recruitment strategies in cancer clinical trials. This study aims to measure the acceptability, preliminary estimates of efficacy, and feasibility of the Trial Library intervention, an Internet-based cancer clinical trial matching tool. This study will also examine the extent to which the Trial Library website, designed to address the linguistic and literacy needs of broader patient populations, influences patient-initiated conversations with physicians about clinical trial participation.

methodsThis is a study protocol for a non-randomized, single-arm pilot study. This is a mixed methods study design that utilizes the statistical analysis of quantitative survey data and the qualitative analysis of interview data to assess the participant experience with the Trial Library intervention. This study will examine (1) acceptability as a measure of participant satisfaction with this intervention, (2) preliminary measure of efficacy as a measure of proportion of participants with documented clinical trial discussion in the electronic medical record, and (3) feasibility of the intervention as a measure of duration of clinical visit. DISCUSSION: The principles that informed the design of the Trial Library intervention aim to be generalizable to clinical trials across many disease contexts. From the ground up, this intervention is built to be inclusive of the linguistic, literacy, and technological needs of underrepresented patient populations. This study will collect essential preliminary data prior to a multi-site randomized clinical trial of the Trial Library intervention.

trial registrationThis study has received institutional approval from the Committee of Human Subjects Research at the University of California, San Francisco.

Indexed as

Cancer disparitiesClinical trialsDigital healthProstate cancerRecruitment science

Identifiers

PMID31720002
PMCPMC6839161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.