ArticleBMJ open2025
Factors that influence clinical trial participation for oncology patients in Australia: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
- Call to action - a novel strategy to improve clinical trial recruitment.Internal medicine journal · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesEnsuring equity in clinical trials has been declared a global priority. Australia is competitive in the international clinical trial sphere. We aimed to explore factors that influence oncology clinical trial participation in Australia.
designScoping review. DATA SOURCES: On 27 May 2024, a systematic search using a predefined strategy was conducted across four electronic databases (Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE and Scopus), grey literature and hand searches. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All cancer (haematological and non-haematological) clinical trials that discussed factors influencing participation in Australia were included. There were no language or age restrictions. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted using a predesigned extraction tool. Quantitative results were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were synthesised using a framework method into four domains (1) patients, (2) healthcare professionals, (3) clinical trials and (4) health services.
resultsOf 1084 citations identified, 393 duplicates were removed. Of the 691 titles and abstracts screened, 54 articles underwent full-text review, and 42 articles were included in the final analysis. Key factors that influence clinical trial participation were identified across all domains, many consistent with the international literature. For example, while self-reported willingness emerged as a key facilitator across diverse patient groups, cohort studies revealed lower participation rates for migrant populations, older patients and those residing in regional areas. Importantly, we were also able to identify the foundations of an evidence base of interventions that directly support increased clinical trial participation.
conclusionThis scoping review contributes new findings to a body of international literature, while contributing a unique Australian perspective. These findings establish the foundations of an evidence base that supports inclusive clinical trial participation.
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.