ArticleAdvances in therapy2023
Patient and Healthcare Professional Insights of Home- and Remote-Based Clinical Assessment: A Qualitative Study from Spain and Brazil to Determine Implications for Clinical Trials and Current Practice.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Conducting clinical trials with self-collection of pharmacokinetic samples: Experience from an exploratory, phase 1, open-label trial of centanafadine SR in healthy individuals.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2025Article
- A scale for measuring nursing digital application skills: a development and psychometric testing study.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Decentralisation in Clinical Trials and Patient Centricity: Benefits and Challenges.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2024Review
- Patient feasibility as a novel approach for integrating IRT and LCA statistical models into patient-centric qualitative data-a pilot study.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic has accelerated the growing trend towards using home- and remote-based medical testing (H/RMT). The aim of this study was to gather insights and explore the opinions of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) in Spain and Brazil regarding H/RMT and the impact of decentralised clinical trials.
methodsThis qualitative study consisted of in-depth open question interviews of HCPs and patients/caregivers followed by a workshop that aimed to determine the advantages and barriers to H/RMT in general, and in the context of clinical trials.
resultsThere were 47 participants in the interviews (37 patients, 2 caregivers, 8 HCPs) and 32 in the validation workshops (13 patients, 7 caregivers, 12 HCPs). The main advantages for the use of H/RMT in current practice were the comfort and convenience, the ability to improve the relationship between HCPs and patients and personalise patient care, and the increased patient awareness towards their disease. Barriers to H/RMT included accessibility, digitalisation, and the training requirements for both HCPs and patients. Furthermore, according to the Brazilian participants, there is a general distrust in the logistical management of H/RMT. Patients indicated that the convenience of H/RMT did not influence their decision to participate in a clinical trial, with the main reason for participating in a clinical trial being to improve health; however, H/RMT in clinical research does aid adherence to the long-term follow-up associated with trials and provides access to patients living far from the clinical sites.
conclusionInsights from patients and HCPs suggest that the advantages of H/RMT may outweigh the barriers, and that social, cultural and geographical factors and the HCP-patient relationship are critical aspects to be considered. Moreover, the convenience of H/RMT does not appear to be a driver for participating in a clinical trial but can facilitate patient diversity and study adherence.
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.