ArticleTrials2026
Design of a card-based operational framework for the implementation of inclusive representation in clinical trials.
Article in Trials, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite growing recognition that trial populations should reflect the broad range of people who will receive therapies, implementation of representative enrollment remains inconsistent. Existing frameworks often lack role-specific guidance, phase-specific actions, and actionable tools to support sponsors-referring specifically to pharmaceutical companies-in embedding inclusive representation (IR) across the trial life cycle. To address these gaps, we developed a card-based operational framework (CBOF) that assigns clear responsibilities, aligns with regulatory expectations, and supports implementation at both the trial and organizational levels.
methodsWe conducted a four-phase methodological study to design the CBOF. First, a structured scoping review identified existing frameworks tackling diverse representation, health equity, and inclusion, as well as guidance documents. Second, we performed a comparative matrix-based analysis to assess operational completeness, surface gaps across 15 frameworks, and to develop the design brief of the developed framework. Third, we held a 120-min expert advisory board consultation with representatives from regulatory, academic, patient advocacy, and pharmaceutical domains to validate the design brief. Fourth, we developed the CBOF using a 5W1H (What, Why, Who, When, Where, How) structure to inform framework content and format.
resultsThe resulting CBOF consists of a modular, card-based tool set organized across nine inclusive representation "IR" categories: seven focused on trial-level design and two on organizational readiness. It includes editable Core Cards to prompt IR planning, Support Cards to provide guidance and role clarification, a library of 349 implementation tactics, and a KPI catalogue to track progress. The framework specifies who is responsible, when and where actions should occur across the product life cycle (discovery through life cycle management) and the clinical trial stages (planning to read out), and how each activity can be executed. It assigns IR-related responsibilities to 15 functional teams and includes step-by-step workflows and decision-question pathways. Expert feedback affirmed the framework's usability, relevance, and completeness, while also informing improvements such as adaptability, integration of digital tools, and expanded guidance on performance metrics.
conclusionsThis framework has been designed to support companies and sponsors, specifically referring to pharmaceutical companies interested in strengthening the representation of real-world patients in clinical trials. The CBOF translates diverse representation, health equity, and inclusion principles into structured, actionable guidance for clinical trial sponsors. It addresses longstanding operational gaps by combining decision-support tools, role-specific delegation, and measurable KPIs across development phases and trial stages. While further validation in real-world settings is needed, the framework represents a practical advancement in operationalizing inclusive trial design and supporting sponsors in meeting regulatory and ethical expectations.
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.