ReviewPerspectives in clinical research
Revolutionizing patient recruitment experience in trials using the design-thinking framework.
Review in Perspectives in clinical research. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In an evolving healthcare ecosystem, it can be challenging to consistently deliver the most effective and efficient care. Design thinking can be an enabler to improve clinical outcomes in healthcare by potentially benefitting the design of new health products, processes, and devices. Clinical trials are vital for enhancing medical knowledge and development of new therapies. However, one of the most persistent challenges faced by sponsors and researchers is the process of patient recruitment in clinical trials. Effective recruitment strategies are crucial for the success of clinical trials, as inadequate enrollment can lead to delays, increased costs, and trial abandonment. Despite decades of efforts to address this issue, the struggle to find eligible patients, high screen failure rates, and competing sites for the same patient pool continue to plague the industry. Patient-centric activities to streamline study recruitment and enroll diverse patient populations have been explored. However, the outcomes of these initiatives have not been as expected, highlighting the need to explore these innovations further. Design thinking is a human-centered approach to problem-solving that emphasizes empathy, collaboration, and iterative testing. We feel it can offer novel insights into patients' needs and behaviors, leading to more engaging and effective recruitment strategies. This article explores the potential of design thinking as a transformative approach to tackle the challenge of patient recruitment in clinical trials, by examining its principles, processes, and benefits. Through this article, we aim to enable sponsors, patients, sites, and contract research organizations (CROs), to enhance enrollment in clinical trials by humanizing the patient trial experience.
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.