ArticleMDM policy & practice
Resistance to a Novel Clinical Trial Design for Multicancer Detection Tests: Experimental Investigation of Ambiguity Aversion.
Article in MDM policy & practice. 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
Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to evaluate multicancer detection (MCD) tests. A novel "intended-effect" RCT design in which control group participants receive MCD testing but results remain undisclosed can increase statistical efficiency. Prospective participants may find this design unacceptable due to ambiguity aversion introduced by the existence of undisclosed but theoretically knowable test results. We evaluated this effect and tested if reducing ambiguity by ensuring the unknowability of test results mitigates this bias. Methods: US adults aged 45 to 70 y ( Results: Intention to participate was similar across all conditions (range: 14%-21%). Study interest was higher in the conventional control ( Conclusion: Intended-effect RCT designs lower interest in MCD trial participation, in part by reducing prospective participants' perceptions of benefiting from the trial. Strategies to reduce ambiguity do not mitigate this effect.
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.