Literature DB >> 7954283

Barriers to clinical trials. Part II: Knowledge and attitudes of potential participants.

W S Schain.   

Abstract

The reasons why less than 3% of cancer patients receive treatment in a clinical trial are complex and multiply determined. Because an individual cannot sign herself into a research study, an understanding of the doctor-patient interaction must be considered in addition to individual patient dynamics. Patients may be concerned that a physician's primary allegiance is to the requirements of the trial, not the specific health needs of the individual. Physicians may worry about the effects that placing an individual in a trial will have on the special doctor-patient relationship. Specific psychologic factors that may make a patient reluctant to enter a trial include self-protectiveness, time and travel constraints, concern about the quality of research versus clinical care, the nature of the informed consent, and worry about the usual low level priority assigned to quality-of-life issues in biomedical research. Enrollment in and adherence to investigative research may be served better by the construction of studies that combine questions about both medical outcome and impact of treatment on patient quality of life. Individuals who require high levels of personal control, want to feel they are a high priority with their physician, and need frequent feedback about results are not likely to be good candidates for investigative research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7954283     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19941101)74:9+<2666::aid-cncr2820741814>3.0.co;2-p

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  18 in total

1.  Pilot study of a point-of-use decision support tool for cancer clinical trials eligibility.

Authors:  P P Breitfeld; M Weisburd; J M Overhage; G Sledge; W M Tierney
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1999 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 2.  Reasons for and against participation in studies of medicinal therapies for women with breast cancer: a debate.

Authors:  Gero Luschin; Marion Habersack; Irmina-Anna Gerlich
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-03-11       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  Development of an electronic health record-based Clinical Trial Alert system to enhance recruitment at the point of care.

Authors:  Peter J Embi; Anil Jain; Jeffrey Clark; C Martin Harris
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2005

Review 4.  The ethics of randomised controlled trials from the perspectives of patients, the public, and healthcare professionals.

Authors:  S J Edwards; R J Lilford; J Hewison
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-10-31

5.  The use of multimedia in the informed consent process.

Authors:  H B Jimison; P P Sher; R Appleyard; Y LeVernois
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  1998 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.497

6.  The accuracy and efficiency of electronic screening for recruitment into a clinical trial on COPD.

Authors:  Christopher N Schmickl; Man Li; Guangxi Li; Marnie M Wetzstein; Vitaly Herasevich; Ognjen Gajic; Roberto P Benzo
Journal:  Respir Med       Date:  2011-05-14       Impact factor: 3.415

7.  Participation of Asian-American women in cancer chemoprevention research: physician perspectives.

Authors:  Tung T Nguyen; Carol P Somkin; Yifei Ma
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Discussions of cancer clinical trials with the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.

Authors:  Margaret M Byrne; Julie Kornfeld; Robin Vanderpool; Marc Belanger
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2011-12-12

9.  Preference assessment of recruitment into a randomized trial for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Lori A Dolan; Vani Sabesan; Stuart L Weinstein; Kevin F Spratt
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Recruitment and retention of women for clinical leiomyoma trials.

Authors:  Desireé McCarthy-Keith; Sahadat Nurudeen; Alicia Armstrong; Eric Levens; Lynnette K Nieman
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2009-09-27       Impact factor: 2.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.