ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2022
Perception of clinical research among patients and healthy volunteers of clinical trials.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mixed Delivery Mode Reminder Strategy to Tackle Low Participation in an e-Cohort: Randomized Controlled Trial Nested Within the Le French Gut e-Cohort.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Trial
- Weighing Open Science Against Research Participation Burden in Informed Consent: A Randomized Pilot Study.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2025Trial
- How to Optimize Healthy Volunteer Screening and Enrolment in Clinical Trials: A Qualitative and Quantitative Approach to Evaluate Processes and Healthy Volunteers' Perceptions.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Understanding recruitment challenges in Swiss oncology trials: Patient voices from focus groups.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2026Article
- Understanding Cancer Clinical Trial Participation in Rural Communities: A Qualitative Focus Group Study.Psycho-oncology · 2026Article
- Impact of emotional intelligence and conflict management on workplace dynamics in Hossana Health Centers, Central Ethiopia.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Ethical and Regulatory Awareness of Clinical Trials: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study from Poland.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Perceptions of health research participation in rural and urban Pennsylvanians.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Cancer Clinical Trial Participation: Perspectives of Patients in the ICON-3 Practice-Based Research Network, Nigeria.JCO global oncology · 2025Article
- Public Perception of Clinical Trials and Its Predictors Among Polish Adults.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Patient-Reported Factors Influencing Clinical Trial Participation: An In-depth Analysis of Patients With Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis.ACR open rheumatology · 2025Review
- Knowledge and perception of a clinical trial among the participants: An experience from oral cholera vaccine study in Koshi Province, Nepal.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Article
- Using patient portals for large-scale recruitment of individuals underrepresented in biomedical research: an evaluation of engagement patterns throughout the patient portal recruitment process at a single site within the All of Us Research Program.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Participant Perceptions in a Long-term Clinical Trial of Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease.Kidney medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeClinical research relies on data from patients and volunteers, yet the target sample size is often not achieved. Here, we assessed the perception of clinical research among clinical trial participants to improve the recruitment process for future studies.
methodsWe conducted a single-center descriptive and exploratory study of 300 current or former participants in various phase I-III clinical trials. Questionnaires were either distributed to current clinical trial participants or emailed to former subjects.
resultsSubjects strongly agreed or agreed that contributing to improving medical care (> 81%), contributing to scientific research (> 79%), and trusting their treating physicians (> 77%) were motives for study participation. Among healthy volunteers, financial motives positively correlated with the number of clinical trials they had participated in (p < 0.05). Higher age positively correlated with expectation of best available treatment during study participation among patients (p < 0.05). Less than 8% of all subjects expressed "great concern" about the potential risks of sharing their personal information as part of the study. Subjects displayed "great trust" or "trust" in medical staff (86.6%) and in government research institutions (76.4%), and "very little trust" or "little trust" in pharmaceutical companies (35.4%) and health insurance companies (16.9%).
conclusionAltruistic motives and trust in treating physicians were predominant motives for clinical trial participation. Older patients expected to receive the best available treatment during participation. Healthy volunteers who reported financial motives had participated in more clinical trials. Consistent with great trust in medical staff and government research institutions, little concern was expressed about the misuse of personal data during the trial.
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.