ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025
Approach to Design and Evaluate Digital Tools to Enhance Young Adult Participation in Clinical Trials: Co-Design and Controlled Intercept Study.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Blockchain-enabled quality by design system for clinical trials.Frontiers in medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCertain populations are underrepresented in clinical trials, limiting the generalizability of new treatments and their efficacy and uptake in these populations. It is essential to identify and understand effective strategies for enrolling young adults in clinical trials, as they represent a vital and key demographic for future clinical trial participation.
objectiveThis study aimed to develop, test, and evaluate digital tools designed to encourage the participation of young adults in the clinical trial process. An interdisciplinary approach, incorporating social listening, qualitative focus groups, and co-design workshops, was used to achieve this goal.
methodsDigital tools were designed and evaluated using a 4-phase approach that included: (1) social listening to characterize lived experiences with COVID-19 trials as self-reported by online users, (2) qualitative focus groups with young adults to explore specific lived attitudes and experiences related to COVID-19 clinical research hesitancy and engagement, (3) a series of cocreation and co-design workshops to build digital tools aimed at encouraging clinical trial participation, and (4) a controlled intercept study to assess the usability and specific outcome measures of the co-designed digital tools among young adults.
resultsA significantly higher change in the likelihood of participating in a clinical trial post exposure was observed among study participants when exposed to prototypes of a mobile app (Δ=0.74 on a 10-point scale, P<.01) and website (Δ=0.93, P<.01) compared to those exposed to a Facebook ad (Δ=0.21) but not a digital flyer (Δ=0.58). Furthermore, those exposed to the mobile app (x̅=5.76, P=.04) and electronic flier (x̅=5.72, P=.04), but not the website (x̅=5.55), exhibited significantly higher postexposure interest in learning about clinical trials when compared to participants exposed to the Facebook (Meta) ad (x̅=5.06). Participants in the intercept study were more likely to consider joining a clinical trial after seeing a mobile app (Δ=0.74, P<.01) or website (Δ=0.93, P<.001) compared to a Facebook ad (Δ=0.21), but the digital flyer (Δ=0.58) did not show a significant difference. In addition, those who saw the mobile app (x̅=5.76, P=.04) or the digital flyer (x̅=5.72, P=.04) showed more interest in learning about clinical trials than those who saw the Facebook ad (x̅=5.06), though the website (x̅= 5.55) did not significantly impact interest.
conclusionsMobile apps and web pages co-designed with young diverse adults may represent effective digital tools to advance shared goals of encouraging inclusive 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.