Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32278242›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2020

Accomplishing an adaptive clinical trial for cancer: Valuation practices and care work across the laboratory and the clinic.

Julia Swallow, Anne Kerr, Choon Key Chekar, Sarah Cunningham-Burley

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 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
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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, 25 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Julia SwallowCentre for Biomedicine, Self and Society, Usher Institute, Old Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH8 9AG, UK. Electronic address: julia.swallow@ed.ac.uk.
Anne KerrSchool of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, G12 8QQ, UK. Electronic address: Anne.Kerr@glasgow.ac.uk.
Choon Key ChekarDivision of Health Research, Faculty of Health & Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK. Electronic address: c.chekar@lancaster.ac.uk.
Sarah Cunningham-BurleyUsher Institute, Old Medical School, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH8 9AG, UK. Electronic address: sarah.c.burley@ed.ac.uk.
University of Edinburgh · GBLancaster University · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A new generation of adaptive, multi-arm clinical trials has been developed in cancer research including those offering experimental treatments to patients based on the genomic analysis of their cancer. Depending on the molecular changes found in patients' cancer cells, it is anticipated that targeted and personalised therapies will be made available for those who have reached the end of standard treatment options, potentially extending survival time. Results from these trials are also expected to advance genomic knowledge for patients in the future. Drawing on data from a qualitative study of one such trial in the UK, comprising observations of out-patient clinic appointments, out-patient biopsy procedures, laboratory work, and interviews with practitioners, this paper explores how the clinical and research value of one such trial was accomplished in everyday practice by focussing on the work of clinical trials and laboratory staff across recruitment, laboratory analysis, and results management. In the face of numerous potential set-backs, disappointments and failure, we explore how practitioners worked to balance the need to meet established measures of value such as numbers of patients recruited into the trial, alongside cultivating the value of positive affects for patients by managing their expectations and emotions. This care work was performed primarily by practitioners whose roles have historically been devalued in healthcare practice and yet, as we show, were critical to this process. We conclude by arguing that as complex multi-arm adaptive trials become more commonplace, we need to attend to, and render visible, the dynamic and care-full valuation practices of backstage practitioners through which experimental biomedicine is accomplished, and in doing so show that care both achieves clinical and research value, and is also a series of practices and processes that tends to tissue, patients and staff in the context of ever-present possibility of failure.

Indexed as

LaboratoriesNeoplasmsAdaptive Clinical Trials as TopicDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansMaleQualitative ResearchBackstage labourCancerCareClinical trialsGenomic medicineUKValuation practices

Identifiers

PMID32278242
PMCPMC7193889
OpenAlexW3013054643

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.