ArticlePharmaceutical medicine2026
Evaluating the Readability of Clinical Trial Content for Patients on Pharmaceutical Company Websites.
Article in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2026. 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.
- An mHealth App to Increase Engagement in Mental Health Services for Depression and Anxiety: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesEfficient and informed patient recruitment, followed by successful enrolment, is essential for the conduct of clinical trials. As major stakeholders in the research process, pharmaceutical companies have an important role in ensuring that information for patients is available and readable. Several global institutions recommend that patient-facing material be written at a literacy level suitable for 11-12-year-olds. This study assessed the availability and readability of clinical trial sections on UK, Canadian, Australian, and global pharmaceutical company websites.
methodsThe 30 largest global pharmaceutical companies (assessed by market capitalisation in April 2025) were selected. Clinical trial content was reviewed for availability and analysed using three validated readability metrics: the Flesch-Kincaid Grade (FKG), Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Index.
resultsOf 115 websites assessed, 54 were eligible for readability analysis. While 96% of global websites included clinical trial information, 55% of non-global websites lacked such content or contained only external links. FKG scores, which estimate the US school grade level needed for comprehension, averaged 10.9 (± 3.5) for global, 14.2 (± 2.0) for UK, 12.1 (± 2.7) for Canadian and 12.8 (± 1.9) for Australian websites-suggesting readability at high school to college level. FRES scores showed similar trends: 42.2 (± 8.0) global, 31.2 (± 9.4) UK, 38.8 (± 12.3) Canadian and 35.7 (± 12.3) Australian, indicating college-level complexity. SMOG scores suggested that 13-15 years of education were needed to understand the material.
conclusionsThese results indicate that clinical trial information on pharmaceutical company websites is often missing or difficult to read and exceeds recommended literacy levels, which may limit comprehension and engagement. Poor readability disproportionately affects individuals with lower literacy, limited English proficiency or disabilities, creating inequities in trial participation. Applying health literacy and plain-language principles-such as simplifying terminology, shortening sentences and using clear formatting-could improve accessibility and support informed decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41396373What 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.