ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2026
Patient perspective of Hesitancies and strategies to increase cancer clinical trial participation.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Strategies to improve accrual and reduce barriers to cancer clinical trials participation are critical for the advancement and implementation of new treatments and processes to improve cancer patient outcomes. While researchers have identified several barriers to accrual from the perspective of health care providers and patients, mechanisms to address and alleviate these concerns are needed to increase participation and interest in clinical trials. Methods: A focus group of 9 people with lived experience of a cancer diagnosis were accrued randomly and provided with a hands-on research experience and educational resources about clinical trials, followed by a focused group discussion to capture perspectives and/or experiences with clinical trials. Focus groups were transcribed and analyzed via Braun & Clarke's 6-phase reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Five key themes were identified as important to increase clinical trial accrual. These included a patient-centered approach, easily digestible educational resources, a personalized understanding of motivating factors, local outreach, and transparency on outcomes and progress of the work. Qualitative input also identified methods that could positively influence accrual rates. Conclusions: Providing participants with opportunities to see first-hand how research works and data are used was noted as an overwhelmingly positive experience that could improve clinical trial accrual rates. This work confirms several previous findings with respect to patient identified barriers to participation in clinical trials and provides support and a framework for development of knowledge translation strategies to increase awareness and knowledge of the importance of clinical research to improve health outcomes for cancer patients.
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.