ArticleCrohn's & colitis 3602024
Toward Patient Centricity: Why Do Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Participate in Pharmaceutical Clinical Trials? A Mixed-Methods Exploration of Study Participants.
Article in Crohn's & colitis 360, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Placebo rates in randomized clinical trials of ulcerative colitis: an individual patient data meta-analysis.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2025Pooled it
- An International Consensus on Appropriate Management of Corticosteroids in Clinical Trials in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Gastroenterology · 2025Pooled it
- Optimising clinical trial design choices in inflammatory bowel disease.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2026Review
- A decade of clinical data with vedolizumab: the past, present, and future.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Rate of Participation in a Second Randomized Clinical Trial and Factors Associated with the Likelihood of Participation among IBD Patients who already Experienced a Randomized Clinical Trial.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2025Article
- Editorial: Striking the Right Balance for Eligibility Criteria for Clinical Trials in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence to revolutionize IBD clinical trials: a comprehensive review.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Advancing therapeutic frontiers: a pipeline of novel drugs for luminal and perianal Crohn's disease management.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A better understanding of motivations to participate as well as recommendations to reduce barriers to enrollment may assist in design of future clinical trials. Methods: We developed a 32-item electronic questionnaire to explore motivations, experiences, and recommendations of inflammatory bowel disease patients, who had participated in pharmaceutical clinical trials in a tertiary center in Canada over the last decade. We employed a mixed-methods approach that integrates both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Results: We distributed a total of 69 e-mails with surveys and received 46 responses (66.6% response rate). Study participants were mostly male (27/46, 58.7%), non-Hispanic White (43/46, 93.5%), with a mean age of 45.5 years (SD 10.9). Most decided to participate in a clinical trial to benefit future patients (29/46, 63.0%). Half of the participants (23/46, 50.0%) reported they were worried about the possibility of receiving placebo, although the majority (29/46, 63.0%) understood they could improve on placebo. The most challenging aspect reported was the number and length of questionnaires (15/46, 32.6%), as well as the number of colonoscopies (14/46, 30.4%). Strategies recommended to increase enrollment were reduction of the chance of receiving placebo (20/46, 43.5%), facilitating inclusion of patients who have failed multiple therapies (20/46, 43.5%), allowing virtual visits (18/46, 39.1%), including subtypes of disease traditionally excluded from trials (16/46, 34.8%) and improving outreach to underrepresented populations (13/46, 28.3%). The vast majority (37/46, 80.4%) reported their experience of participation to be better than expected. Conclusions: These results should help inform the design of future clinical trials with a focus on patient-centricity.
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.