Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38456181›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2024

Influences on clinical trial participation: Enhancing recruitment through a gender lens - A scoping review.

Lyndon J Hawke, Elizabeth Nelson, Penny O'Brien, Kay M Crossley, Peter F Choong, Samantha Bunzli, Michelle M Dowsey

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. 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

7 authors.

Lyndon J HawkeUniversity of Melbourne, Department of Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia.
Elizabeth NelsonUniversity of Melbourne, Department of Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia.
Penny O'BrienUniversity of Melbourne, Department of Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia.
Kay M CrossleySchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia.
Peter F ChoongUniversity of Melbourne, Department of Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia.
Samantha BunzliSchool of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, Queensland, Australia.
Michelle M DowseyUniversity of Melbourne, Department of Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Suboptimal clinical trial recruitment contributes to research waste. Evidence suggests there may be gender-based differences in willingness to participate in clinical research. Identifying gender-based differences impacting the willingness of trial participation may assist trial recruitment. Objectives: To examine factors that influence the willingness of men and women to participate in clinical trials and to identify modifiable factors that may be targeted to optimise trial participation. Material and methods: Electronic databases were searched with key words relating to 'gender', 'willingness to participate' and 'trial'. Included studies were English language and reported gender-based differences in willingness to participate in clinical trials, or factors that influence a single gender to participate in clinical trials. Studies were excluded if they described the demographic factors of trial participants or if the majority of participants were pregnant. Extracted data were coded, categorized, analysed thematically and interpreted using Arksey and O'Malley's framework. Results: Sixty-three studies were included. Two main themes were identified: trial characteristics and participant characteristics. A number of gender-based differences moderating willingness to participate were observed although only one, 'concern for self' was found to influence actual trial participation rates between genders. Conclusion: The relationship between factors influencing willingness to participate in clinical trials is complex. The influence of gender on willingness to participate, while important, may be moderated by other factors including socioeconomic status, ethnicity and health condition. Exploring factors that influence willingness to participate specific to a study cohort likely offers the most promise to optimise trial recruitment of that cohort.

Indexed as

GenderParticipationRecruitmentScoping reviewTrialWillingness

Identifiers

PMID38456181
PMCPMC10918492

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.