ArticlePloS one2026
Understanding how the informed consent process influences the decision to participate in an adaptive platform trial: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe complex design of adaptive platform trials may be challenging for prospective participants and their families and/or substitute decision makers to understand when approached for informed consent. The purpose of this scoping review is to explore and synthesize literature on how the informed consent process influences the decision to participate in an adaptive platform trial.
methodsA scoping review of empirical literature published in English was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsychInfo databases (1976-2025). A key term search strategy examined the overarching concepts of informed consent process and adaptive platform trials. Empirical studies whose participants were adults in a health care delivery or clinical research setting were included. The outcome of interest was factors that affect eligible trial participant decisions to participate in adaptive platform trials. Grey literature was further searched to substantiate and complement the peer reviewed literature.
resultsOf 1085 articles reviewed, four met inclusion criteria. The four papers highlighted challenges in explaining to prospective participants how the randomization ratio may change during the trial and how likely participants are to benefit, as well as the importance of communication outside of the written consent form. Eight grey literature results were included, covering an emerging policy and regulatory discourse, as well as nascent empirical studies examining alternate delivery modalities for consent information.
conclusionsLimited data highlight the importance of empirical investigation into how to facilitate informed participation in adaptive platform trials. More research is needed to understand how this trial design may affect enrollment decisions and therefore associated policies and processes needed to support informed participation in this modernized trial design.
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.