Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39901901›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025

Preferences and Attitudes Towards Digital Communication and Symptom Reporting Methods in Clinical Trials.

Bryan McDowell, Kelly M Dumais, Sarah Tressel Gary, Ingeborg de Gooijer, Tomás Ward

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. 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

5 authors.

Bryan McDowelleCOA Science, Clario, Geneva, Switzerland.
Kelly M DumaiseCOA Science, Clario, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Sarah Tressel GaryeCOA Science, Clario, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Ingeborg de GooijereCOA Science, Clario, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Tomás WardInsight Science Foundation Ireland Research Centre for Data Analytics, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: With the growing use of digital health technologies (DHT) in clinical trials, the opportunity to use technology to promote greater patient centricity and inclusivity has emerged. Current technology provides various mechanisms for communication, eg, through voice or text, however, participant familiarity and preference for them is poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to understand participants' communication preferences, their comfort with and use of messaging methods and their attitudes towards different communication and technology-driven symptom reporting methods in clinical trials. Participants and Methods: Fifty-five participants, with any form of chronic health condition or recent intervention causing daily pain or discomfort were recruited by way of convenience sample for a single-centre, non-interventional, single-visit study, conducted in Ireland. Participants completed a questionnaire on communications preferences via an app on the participants' own electronic device. Results: In communication with friends and family, 69.6% of participants most preferred to use a messaging service. In communication with their healthcare provider, 72.7% preferred phone calls. Respondents preferred to communicate with friends/family via text messages (80.4%) over other methods. In clinical trial settings, participants are willing to use messaging methods to communicate with their physician. When reporting symptoms, most preferred a phone/video call to physicians (50.9%) and touch screen on device/smartphone (47.3%). 72.7% preferred to report symptoms using their own phone. Some respondents were interested in having the device read the questions/answers aloud (36.4%) and answer questions verbally (41.8%). Conclusion: Participants were familiar with various communication methods but showed different preferences to communicate with friends and family versus healthcare professionals. For reporting symptoms in a clinical trial while at home, split results suggested a preference for independent reporting as well as live communication with physician, perhaps reflecting the rising use of telehealth. Further exploration is needed for the use of questions read aloud or answered verbally when reporting symptoms in a clinical trial.

Indexed as

DHTdigital health technologyeCOAelectronic clinical outcome assessmentspatient reported outcomePRO

Identifiers

PMID39901901
PMCPMC11789515

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.