4.4 Letter

Commentary: an industry perspective on the importance of incorporating participant voice before, during, and after clinical trials

Journal

TRIALS
Volume 23, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06905-6

Keywords

Patient and public involvement; Recruitment; Retention

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It is increasingly recognized that involving patients and the public in the design of clinical trials can lead to better recruitment, retention, and satisfaction. However, commercial organizations tend not to publish their findings, leading to a potential two-tier experience for trial participants depending on whether the trial they participate in will be industry-funded or government-funded.
It is increasingly recognized that involving patients and the public in the design of clinical trials can lead to better recruitment, retention, and satisfaction. A recent scoping review determined that between 1985 and 2018, just 23 articles meeting quality criteria obtained feedback from clinical trial participants after a trial had been completed. In a timespan that presumably included thousands of trials across hundreds of indications, the paucity of the literature seems surprising, if not outright disappointing. By contrast, practitioners in the life sciences industry are increasingly incorporating patient research into their trial design process before, during, and after trial completion. Examples of approaches used include recruitment of look alike participant samples through online communities, surveys, and the use of smartphone apps to directly record participants' spoken reactions to trial materials like recruitment materials, site visit schedules, or informed consent materials. However, commercial organizations tend not to publish their findings, leading to a potential two-tier experience for trial participants depending on whether the trial they participate in will be industry-funded or government-funded. This seems problematic on a number of levels. Increasing regulatory, funder, and publisher interest in improving the inclusivity of clinical trial participants may act as a timely lever to spur patient-centered coproduction of trials. Until continuous feedback processes are the mandated, funded, and published norm, participating in a clinical trial will be more arduous than it needs to be.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available