Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40822492›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025

Healthy participant engagement in early clinical trials: results from the European EUFEMED survey.

J Klein, T van Iersel, D de Vries, Y Donazzolo, I Klingmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

J KleinSGS, Clinical Pharmacology Unit, Antwerpen, Belgium.
T van IerselClinical Pharmacology, ICON, Groningen, Netherlands.
D de VriesClinical Research and Development, Miltenyi, Leiden, Netherlands.
Y DonazzoloEurofins Optimed, Grenoble, France.
I KlingmannPharmaplex, Wezembeek-Oppem, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: While numerous healthy volunteers contribute to clinical trials on a yearly basis, the aspect of including these participants in the drug development process, like the patient-centric approaches, are not well known. To gain broader insights in the aspect of healthy participant engagement, preferences, and motivation, we performed a European wide survey. Additionally, a literature search on the topic of healthy participant engagement was performed. Methods: An online questionnaire containing 61 questions on demographics, motivation, informed consent, engagement, transparency, and preferences was created, combining five-point Likert and open text field answers. The questionnaire was translated in several European languages and shared among early phase clinical trial units within Europe. Additionally, a literature search was performed on healthy participant engagement. Results: A total of 4,349 completed questionnaires were eligible for analysis. Countries with adequate number of responses were Belgium, France, Netherlands, Germany, Hungary and United Kingdom. Altruistic motivation was the primary reason for participation. The Informed Consent Form (ICF) paragraphs on risk, schedule of assessments and restriction was better read than the financial aspects, ethics and data protection, with variations between gender, age, experience and country. Only 71.2% of the responders finds an ICF written in correct lay language and 44.6% is willing to assist in ICF review on adequate lay language. In the literature search, no articles described healthy participant engagement. Discussion: The benefit of including patients in the drug development process has been proven in multiple publications and is a movement that is being advocated more frequently. Healthy participant engagement is not known yet, while similar benefits can be suggested. As altruistic reasons are the main motivation for participation, engaging participant in the clinical trials might enhance their motivation. Together with all stakeholders, description of methods for healthy participant engagement should be initiated to increase willingness to contribute to clinical trials.

Indexed as

early clinical developmenthealthy volunteerlayman’s reviewparticipant centricityparticipant engagement

Identifiers

PMID40822492
PMCPMC12355198

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.