ReviewTrials2024
Recommendations for developing accessible patient information leaflets for clinical trials to address English language literacy as a barrier to research participation.
Review in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Language-related eligibility criteria in UK randomised trials: a systematic review of extended research reports.Trials · 2026Pooled it
- Translation and interpreting services must be considered across the lifecycle of clinical trials.Trials · 2026Article
- Article
- Readability of patient information leaflets for commonly used medicines in the UK, Germany and Türkiye: a cross-sectional document analysis.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- A Pilot Study to Explore Length and Readability Characteristics of Subject Information Sheets/Informed Consent Forms of Clinical Trial Applications in the EU.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- PPI in LifeMap-QUEST: an example of co-producing videos in different languages to support inclusion in a clinical study.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- A comparative analysis of clinical quality and readability of neuropathic pain patient information leaflets: Türkiye versus the United States.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Historical Advances in Clinical Trial Design and Expanding Representation as the New Frontier for Innovation.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Article
- Which demographic characteristics are associated with willingness to take part in recontact studies? A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLow English language literacy is a common barrier to participation in clinical trials. Patient information leaflets (PILs) used in clinical trials are often lengthy, complex and have poor readability; this is a persistent and prevalent problem common to trials across the world. Simplifying the information provided in PILs can lead to improved understanding, comprehension and knowledge. The aim of this project was to develop recommendations for developing accessible PILs for clinical trials through a literature review of published and grey literature and co-working with marginalised communities, patients, and health and social care charities.
methodsA literature review of MEDLINE, Embase and online resources was conducted, and recommendations for developing accessible PILs were extracted from eligible published and grey literature. Grey literature which contained insights into more inclusive forms of communication was also identified and summarised. Meetings were held with two racially marginalised community groups, two groups involving autistic adults and/or adults with learning difficulties and a patient advisory group. Examples of accessible PILs were shared and discussions held about the content and format of the PILs and suggestions for changes/improvements. National Voices, a coalition of health and social care charities in England, held a national online workshop with charities and lived experience partners. Recommendations identified from the multiple sources were coded, collated and refined to develop an overarching framework of recommendations.
resultsThe framework consists of 74 recommendations for developing accessible PILs for clinical trials. Recommendations cover the five topics of formatting, information presentation, writing style, content and accessibility.
conclusionsThis project has developed a comprehensive framework of recommendations to guide researchers in the development of accessible PILs for clinical trials. Findings from previous research and from co-working with marginalised communities, patients and health and social care charities were collated to ensure that a diverse range of voices and experiences informed the framework. These recommendations aim to support researchers to develop better study information to reduce English language literacy as a barrier to participation in clinical trials.
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.