Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37312206›Full record

ArticleTrials2023

Patient communication and experiences in cancer clinical drug trials: a mixed-method study at a specialist clinical trials unit.

Rowan Forbes Shepherd, Ashleigh Bradford, Marian Lieschke, Kylie Shackleton, Amelia Hyatt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rowan Forbes ShepherdDepartment of Health Services Research and Implementation Science, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan Street, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia. rowan.forbesshepherd@petermac.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4510-0542
Ashleigh BradfordDepartment of Health Services Research and Implementation Science, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan Street, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Marian LieschkeParkville Cancer Clinical Trials Unit, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Kylie ShackletonParkville Cancer Clinical Trials Unit, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
Amelia HyattDepartment of Health Services Research and Implementation Science, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, 305 Grattan Street, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia. amelia.hyatt@petermac.org.
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs cancer therapies increase in their complexity, effective communication among patients, physicians, and research staff is critical for optimal clinical trial management. Currently, we understand little about on-trial communication practices and patient trial experiences over time. This mixed-method study explored patient experiences of participating in a clinical drug trial at different time points, focussing on patient communication with trial staff.

methodsPatients enrolled in clinical drug trials conducted at the Parkville Cancer Clinical Trials Unit were invited to complete a tailored online survey and/or a qualitative interview. Patients were recruited to three cohorts based on time since the first trial treatment: new (≥ 1 to ≤ 13 weeks), mid- (≥ 14 to ≤ 26 weeks), and long-term (≥ 52 weeks) trial patients. Descriptive statistics were calculated for survey responses. Interview data were analysed thematically with a team-based approach. Survey and interview data were integrated at the intepretation stage.

resultsFrom May to June 2021, 210 patients completed a survey (response rate 64%, 60% male), 20 completed interviews (60% male), and 18 completed both. More long-term trial patients (46%) participated than new (29%) and mid-trial patients (26%). Survey data showed high (> 90%) patient satisfaction with the provision of trial information and communication with trial staff across trial stages, and many reported trial experiences as above and beyond standard care. Interview data indicated that written trial information could be overwhelming, and verbal communication with the staff and physicians was highly valued, especially for enrolment and side effect management among long-term patients. Patients described the key points along the clinical trial trajectory that merit close attention: clear and well-communicated randomisation practices, reliable pathways for side effect reporting and prompt response from the trial staff, and end-of-trial transition management to avoid a sense of abandonment.

conclusionPatients reported high overall satisfaction with trial management but outlined key pinch points requiring improved communication practices. Establishing a range of effective communication practices among trial staff and physicians with patients in cancer clinical trials may have a wide range of positive effects on patient accrual, retention, and satisfaction.

Indexed as

Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsNeoplasmsCommunicationFemaleHumansMalePatientsPatient SatisfactionCancer clinical trialsCommunicationMixed-methodPatient experience

Identifiers

PMID37312206
PMCPMC10262501
OpenAlexW4380482695

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.