ArticleJAMA network open2024
Remote Monitoring and Data Collection for Decentralized Clinical Trials.
Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital transformation of clinical trials with remote patient monitoring solutions.npj health systems · 2026Review
- Feasibility of Home-Based Spirometry Monitoring as a Decentralized Clinical Trial Component in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Other Respiratory Diseases.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Multiregional Decentralized Clinical Trial Program to Improve Access.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Focused ultrasound for brain metastases.Neuro-oncology advances · 2026Review
- Emergent technologies in clinical neurophysiology to study the neuromuscular system: IFCN handbook chapter.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2026Review
- Assessing reporting completeness and characteristics in decentralized randomized controlled trials: a scoping review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Efficient data consensus algorithm integrating FL and blockchain dynamic partition protocol PBFT.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- From reactive to proactive: Continuous protein monitoring for preventive health care.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Review
- Ex Vivo Traceability Platform for Phospholipoproteomic Formulations: Functional Evidence Without Clinical Exposure.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Integrating mHealth Innovations into Decentralized Oncology Trials.Journal of medical systems · 2025Review
- Inequalities in access to industry-funded interventional phase I-IV drug trials in epilepsy.Epilepsia open · 2025Article
- Big data approaches for novel mechanistic insights on sleep and circadian rhythms: a workshop summary.Sleep · 2025Article
- Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic Mitigation Strategies on Cancer Treatment Trials: A Meta-Analysis of Industry and National Cancer Institute Studies.JCO oncology advances · 2025Article
- Adoption of Decentralized Trial Elements in Cancer Clinical Trials Supporting FDA Approvals during COVID-19.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025Article
- SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Leptomeningeal metastatic disease: new frontiers and future directions.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Patient-centric clinical trials: collaboration and innovation in bioanalytical and clinical operations.Bioanalysis · 2025Article
- Study on knowledge, practices, and attitudes toward decentralized clinical trials among the clinical trial practitioners in China.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence to revolutionize IBD clinical trials: a comprehensive review.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Cancer in rural America: Improving access to clinical trials and quality of oncologic care.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Less than 5% of patients with cancer enroll in a clinical trial, partly due to financial and logistic burdens, especially among underserved populations. The COVID-19 pandemic marked a substantial shift in the adoption of decentralized trial operations by pharmaceutical companies. Objective: To assess the current global state of adoption of decentralized trial technologies, understand factors that may be driving or preventing adoption, and highlight aspirations and direction for industry to enable more patient-centric trials. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Bloomberg New Economy International Cancer Coalition, composed of patient advocacy, industry, government regulator, and academic medical center representatives, developed a survey directed to global biopharmaceutical companies of the coalition from October 1 through December 31, 2022, with a focus on registrational clinical trials. The data for this survey study were analyzed between January 1 and 31, 2023. Exposure: Adoption of decentralized clinical trial technologies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The survey measured (1) outcomes of different remote monitoring and data collection technologies on patient centricity, (2) adoption of these technologies in oncology and all therapeutic areas, and (3) barriers and facilitators to adoption using descriptive statistics. Results: All 8 invited coalition companies completed the survey, representing 33% of the oncology market by revenues in 2021. Across nearly all technologies, adoption in oncology trials lags that of all trials. In the current state, electronic diaries and electronic clinical outcome assessments are the most used technology, with a mean (SD) of 56% (19%) and 51% (29%) adoption for all trials and oncology trials, respectively, whereas visits within local physician networks is the least adopted at a mean (SD) of 12% (18%) and 7% (9%), respectively. Looking forward, the difference between the current and aspired adoption rate in 5 years for oncology is large, with respondents expecting a 40% or greater absolute adoption increase in 8 of the 11 technologies surveyed. Furthermore, digitally enabled recruitment, local imaging capabilities, and local physician networks were identified as technologies that could be most effective for improving patient centricity in the long term. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings may help to galvanize momentum toward greater adoption of enabling technologies to support a new paradigm of trials that are more accessible, less burdensome, and more inclusive.
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.