Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
What was that say
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

What Keeps Patients Out of Clinical Trials? – Medscape (Lori M. Minasian & Joseph M. Unger | May 2020)

Posted by saviorteam in on June 14, 2020
Keywords: Clinical trial, Human research ethics, Medical research, Protection for participants, Researcher responsibilities, Respect for persons
Solitary female medical staff beside equipment

The conduct of clinical trials is key to identifying better ways to prevent and detect cancer in persons at risk and to treat patients diagnosed with cancer. Unfortunately, while patient participation in a clinical trial is entirely voluntary, few patients actually have the opportunity to consider trial participation. Instead, a combination of structural and clinical barriers intercedes to bar opportunities for trial participation for most patients. There are multiple fronts by which to improve the drivers underlying the system, and we offer three of them here.

“Clinical trials are key to advancing cancer research, yet patient participation remains low. What factors may account for this?” We expected this to explore participants’ views, but this is more from the perspective of clinical trial coordinators. Nevertheless, it is a useful discussion.

Much of the literature about accrual to clinical trials has focused on the patient’s willingness to participate. Seldom have researchers considered the entire trial decision-making pathway for patients. We previously conducted a systematic review of the literature and found 7,576 articles and abstracts matching the search terms “clinical trial accrual”, “clinical trial enrollment”, “enrollment in clinical trials”, “clinical trial enrollment barriers”, and “patient participation in clinical trials” in combination with the term “cancer.” Among these, only 13 studies explicitly examined the entire clinical trial decision-making pathway beginning at patient diagnosis.[1] We found that no trial was locally available for 56% of all patients with cancer, representing a structural barrier to clinical trial participation of considerable magnitude. Among remaining patients, 21% were not eligible for a trial. Thus, for more than three (77%) of four patients with cancer, the opportunity for the patient’s physician to offer a trial and for the patient to volunteer to participate is not even possible. Under these conditions, patient choice has limited influence on the overall pattern of trial participation.
.

The findings above highlight how structural barriers at the institutional level dominate trial decision making. Institutional participation in research requires a substantial investment in the conduct and oversight of clinical trials. Even if an institution chooses to build a trial program, its physicians and other health care providers must then choose to serve as investigators or research staff in clinical trials. The challenges of implementing such a program were examined in two recent studies. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP; previously the NCI’s Community Clinical Oncology Program [CCOP]) is designed to expand access to clinical trials and promote cancer treatment innovations for community-based patients who often have limited opportunity to travel to major cancer centers to receive care.[2] On the basis of data from 41 administrative, physician, and nurse key informants from five sites, McAlearney et al[3] identified several major themes representing the administrative, financial, and organizational challenges of implementing a clinical trial program at a community site, including a lack of understanding and appreciation of the value and conduct of trial participation, the cost of supporting the program and meeting program requirements, managing clinic workflow changes as they pertained to patient recruitment and physician involvement, and sustaining hospital leadership support.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

Related Reading

No Related Readings Found!

Related Links

Complaints against Research Ethics Monthly

Request a Takedown

Submission Guidelines

About the Research Ethics Monthly

About subscribing to the Research Ethics Monthly

A diverse group discussing a topic

Random selected image from the AHRECS library. These were all purchased from iStockPhoto. These are images we use in our workshops and Dr Allen used in the GUREM.

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in