ArticleCancer2020
Patient familiarity with, understanding of, and preferences for clinical trial endpoints and terminology.
Article in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Understanding of Oncology Clinical Trial Endpoints in Direct-to-Consumer Television Advertising.The oncologist · 2023Trial
- Evaluating Patient Preferences for Clinical Trial Endpoints in Early-Stage Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment in Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Embedding nutrition into routine oncology care: about time?Oncology reviews · 2026Review
- Decoding clinical trial jargon: helping people understand how safety and quality of life are assessed in cancer trials.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Willingness of adolescent girls and young women to participate in future clinical trials of long-acting PrEP implants for HIV prevention, Kampala Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Decoding clinical trial jargon: helping people understand the efficacy end points used in cancer trials.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Outcomes that matter to patients with cancer: living longer and living better.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Review
- Article
- Experts' Views on FDA Regulatory Standards for Drug and High-Risk Medical Devices: Implications for Patient Care.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Selection of endpoints in breast cancer clinical trials: a qualitative study of key trial stakeholders.American journal of cancer research · 2022Article
- Accessing Targeted Therapies: A Potential Roadblock to Implementing Precision Oncology?JCO oncology practice · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough there is increased attention to designing and explaining clinical trials in ways that are clinically meaningful for patients, there is limited information on patient preferences, understanding, and perceptions of this content.
methodsMaximum difference scaling (MaxDiff) methodology was used to develop a survey for assessing patients' understanding of 19 clinical terms and perceived importance of 9 endpoint surrogate phrases used in clinical trials and consent forms. The survey was administered electronically to individuals with metastatic breast cancer affiliated with the Metastatic Breast Cancer Alliance. Analyses were performed using Bayesian P values with statistical software.
resultsAmong 503 respondents, 77% had a college degree, 70% were diagnosed with metastatic disease ≥2 years before survey completion, and 77% had received ≥2 lines of systemic therapy. Less than 35% of respondents reported understanding "fairly well" the terms symptomatic progression, duration of disease control, time to treatment cessation, and endpoints. Income level and time since onset of metastatic disease correlated with comprehension. Patients who had received ≥6 lines of therapy perceived that time until serious side effects (P < .001) and time on therapy (P < .001) were more important compared with those who had received only 1 line of therapy. Positively phrased parameters were associated with increased perceived importance.
conclusionsEven among educated, heavily pretreated patients, many commonly used clinical research terms are poorly understood. Comprehension and the perceived importance of trial endpoints vary over the course of disease. These observations may inform the design, discussion, and reporting of clinical trials.
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.