ArticleTumori2025
Engagement in cancer clinical trials among a nationally representative cancer survivor sample: Motivators, barriers and opportunities for improvement.
Article in Tumori, 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.
- Understanding recruitment challenges in Swiss oncology trials: Patient voices from focus groups.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMost patients with cancer do not participate in a clinical trial. Understanding clinical participation rates, and the barriers and motivators that influence participation may help identify opportunities for improvement in accrual.
methodsA cross-sectional analysis of cancer survivors was conducted using the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) administered in 2020. Primary outcome was clinical trial participation amongst patients with cancer. Secondary outcomes were motivators and barriers to influence clinical trial participation. Logistic regression was employed to assess the association of clinical trials being discussed as a cancer treatment option with social determinants.
resultsSix hundred and eighteen respondents (weighted population estimate 22,723,047) with a self-reported history of cancer were included. Overall, 15.7% reported an invitation to participate in a clinical trial, of which 37.8% participated. Clinical trials were discussed as a cancer treatment option amongst 13.5% of respondents. Knowledge of clinical trials was low (9.3%). Reported motivators included trying new care (72.3%), wanting to get better (88.9%), getting paid (40.1%), helping other people (73.0%), and encouragement from the doctor (73.7%) or family/friends (59.5%). Reported barriers included getting transportation, childcare or paid time off work (42.4%), and standard care not covered by insurance (69.6%). Race (Other, OR 3.84) and income (<$35k, OR 5.84) were associated with discussion of clinical trials as a cancer treatment option.
conclusionClinical trial treatment discussion, invitation, and participation are low among patients with a history of cancer. Although the study identified multiple motivators and barriers to participation, improvement in the rates of discussion and invitation to participate in a clinical trial are required. Nevertheless, addressing the identified barriers and motivators that influence clinical trial participation may be a strategy to optimize patient enrollment.
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.