ArticlePatient education and counseling2024
Disparities in cancer clinical trials information-seeking: Findings from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.
Article in Patient education and counseling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preguntas Sobre Cáncer (Questions About Cancer): Analysis of Spanish Inquiries to the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- The National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service: 50 years of service to the nation.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2026Article
- Characterizing Inquiries About Novel Cancer Therapies: Findings from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.Journal of immunotherapy and precision oncology · 2025Article
- Clinical trial knowledge, discussion, and participation among cancer survivors: A HINTS-SEER study.Patient education and counseling · 2025Article
- Cancer prognosis information-seeking among survivors and caregivers: findings from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo better understand cancer clinical trials (CCT) information-seeking, a necessary precursor to patient and provider engagement with CCT.
methodsData from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service (CIS) were used to examine CCT information-seeking patterns over a 5-year period. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine characteristics of CIS inquiries and their associations with having a CCT discussion.
resultsBetween September 2018 - August 2023, 117,016 CIS inquiries originated from cancer survivors, caregivers, health professionals, and the general public; 27.5 % of these inquiries included a CCT discussion (n = 32,160). Among CCT discussions, 35.5 % originated from survivors, 53.5 % from caregivers, 6.1 % from the public, and 4.9 % from health professionals. Inquiries in Spanish had lower odds of a CCT discussion (OR=.26, [.25-.28]), whereas inquiries emanating from the CIS instant messaging (OR=2.29, [2.22-2.37]) and email (OR=1.24, [1.18-1.30]) platforms were associated with higher odds of discussing CCT compared to the telephone. Individuals who were male, younger, insured, and had higher income and education had significantly higher odds of a CCT discussion while those who were non-Hispanic Black and living in rural locales had significantly lower odds.
conclusionsDisparities in CCT information-seeking may contribute to downstream CCT participation. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Quality, language-concordant health information is needed to enable equitable awareness of - and ultimately engagement in - CCT.
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.