Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40104849›Full record

ArticleJNCI cancer spectrum2025

AI meets informed consent: a new era for clinical trial communication.

Michael Waters

Abstract readEditorialComment
In one paragraph

Article in JNCI cancer spectrum, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Digital Tools and Strategies for Engaging Patients in Cancer Clinical Trials.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Michael WatersDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5070-2244

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical trials are fundamental to evidence-based medicine, providing patients with access to novel therapeutics and advancing scientific knowledge. However, patient comprehension of trial information remains a critical challenge, as registries like ClinicalTrials.gov often present complex medical jargon that is difficult for the general public to understand. While initiatives such as plain-language summaries and multimedia interventions have attempted to improve accessibility, scalable and personalized solutions remain elusive. This study explores the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically GPT-4, to enhance patient education regarding cancer clinical trials. By leveraging informed consent forms from ClinicalTrials.gov, the researchers evaluated 2 artificial intelligence (AI)-driven approaches-direct summarization and sequential summarization-to generate patient-friendly summaries. Additionally, the study assessed the capability of LLMs to create multiple-choice question-answer pairs (MCQAs) to gauge patient understanding. Findings demonstrate that AI-generated summaries significantly improved readability, with sequential summarization yielding higher accuracy and completeness. MCQAs showed high concordance with human-annotated responses, and over 80% of surveyed participants reported enhanced understanding of the author's in-house BROADBAND trial. While LLMs hold promise in transforming patient engagement through improved accessibility of clinical trial information, concerns regarding AI hallucinations, accuracy, and ethical considerations remain. Future research should focus on refining AI-driven workflows, integrating patient feedback, and ensuring regulatory oversight. Addressing these challenges could enable LLMs to play a pivotal role in bridging gaps in clinical trial communication, ultimately improving patient comprehension and participation.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceClinical Trials as TopicInformed ConsentPatient Education as TopicCommunicationComprehensionConsent FormsFemaleHumansLanguageNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID40104849
PMCPMC11964292

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.