ArticlePloS one2025
Providing brief information on clinical trials in appropriate formats may improve impressions and willingness to participate among socioeconomically disadvantaged people in France.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundClinical trial (CTs) participation rates are low worldwide, including in France. One barrier to participation is a lack of familiarity with CTs, especially in socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. We aimed to ascertain whether providing brief information on CTs to these populations could improve their impression of and participation in CTs.
methodsWe conducted an online cross-sectional survey among socioeconomically disadvantaged adults living in mainland France. The questionnaire included three parts: 1) routine sociodemographic and socioeconomic questions, health-related variables, and questions on health literacy and numeracy, 2) questions on their impression of CTs and their health, and 3) three questions to assess their comprehension of tables. After completing the questionnaire, participants were randomized into three groups that received an information note on CTs in text (one group) or tabular (two groups) format. The content in tabular format was slightly different for both groups. The same CT questions were asked again to assess possible changes in participants' impression of CTs.
resultsAmong 401 participants, 368 (91.8%) had heard about CTs. Median age of the latter was 40 years, 64% were women, 57% had limited health literacy, and 13% had poor comprehension of tables (score = 0). After reading the brief CT information note, the median CT impression score increased significantly from 5.0 to 6.5 (p-value < 0.001, effect size r = 0.47) within all sub-groups (e.g., according to the comprehension of tables score, according to health literacy level), except for the sub-group with poor comprehension of tables subsequently given CT information in tabular form. DISCUSSION/
conclusionThe initial impression of CTs was quite poor in this socioeconomically disadvantaged sample, but improved after the brief information note on CTs was provided. Information campaigns on CTs could help increase CT participation rates among socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. In this perspective, the information format may be just as important as the content.
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.