Barriers and facilitators to the participation of subjects in clinical trials: An overview of reviews

PROGRESS: A Patient-centered Engagement Infrastructure and Multi-level Approach to Enrich Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in a National Randomized Online Behavioral Pain Treatment Study

Twenty percent of individuals experience chronic pain worldwide posing significant challenges to those living with it. Pain research is crucial for developing and characterizing effective strategies to reduce the burden of chronic pain. Traditional research approaches often yield homogeneous study samples that poorly generalize and have unknown applicability across diverse patient populations. The Pain Relief with Online Groups that Empower Skills-based Symptom Reduction (PROGRESS) study aims to address disparities in pain research engagement and patient outcomes through the intentional inclusion of people with varied backgrounds and experiences of pain, and through a multilevel design informed by diverse stakeholder recommendations. The composition of three advisory boards (Patient Engagement and Diversity Board, Local Patient Advisory Board, and the National Patient Advisory Panel) prioritized diversity in patient/expert advisor background, geographic location, race, and ethnicity. Our engagement approach aligns with the Foundational Expectations for Partnerships in Research by Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI), which emphasizes diverse representation, early and ongoing engagement, dedicated funds for advisor compensation, collaborative decision making, meaningful participation, and continuous assessment. The first 24 months of study advisor engagement has yielded multiple recruitment strategies resulting in a study population enriched with a breadth of identities within PROGRESS (e.g., inclusive patient-facing materials). Lessons learned underscore the importance of investing time in building patient and stakeholder relationships, trust, and embracing diverse viewpoints amongst the study team. PROGRESS demonstrates the potential of diverse patient-centered engagement to support evidence-based outcomes and practices that are more inclusive, equitable, and representative of the broader population. PERSPECTIVE: The PROGRESS study demonstrates how diverse patient engagement and inclusive advisory boards enhance research outcomes. By aligning with PCORI standards and employing innovative recruitment strategies, it highlights the vital role of stakeholder relationships and diverse perspectives. Key lessons learned emphasize adaptive strategies and continuous feedback for advancing equitable pain research.

Total energy expenditure measured using doubly labeled water in adults with major chronic diseases: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Energy requirement assessment is a cornerstone for nutrition practice. The extent to which total energy expenditure (TEE; indicator of energy requirements) has been measured in adults with chronic diseases has not been explored.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to characterize evidence on TEE among individuals with chronic diseases and describe TEE across chronic diseases and comparison with controls without a chronic disease.

METHODS

A literature search using terms related to doubly labeled water and TEE was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase. Eligible articles included those that measured TEE using doubly labeled water in adults with a major chronic disease. Methodological quality was determined using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics quality criteria checklist. Sample size-weighted TEE was calculated in each chronic disease subgroup.

RESULTS

Fifty studies were included, of which 15 had a control group. Median sample size was 20 participants, and approximately half of studies were published over 10 y ago. Thirty-five (70%) studies reported resting energy expenditure, and approximately half (k = 26) reported physical activity level. Methodological quality was neutral (k = 25) or positive (k = 23) for most studies. TEE among individual studies ranged from 934 to 3274 kcal/d. Mean weighted TEE was lowest among gastrointestinal (1786 kcal/d) and neurologic (2104 kcal/d) subgroups and highest among cancer (2903 kcal/d), endocrine (2661 kcal/d), and autoimmune (2625 kcal/d) subgroups. Excluding 1 article in cancer survivors resulted in a low TEE in the cancer subgroup (2112 kcal/d). Most studies with a control group reported no differences in TEE between controls and patients; however, only 1 study was powered for between-group comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Energy requirements vary across chronic diseases, although there is insufficient evidence to suggest that TEE in patients with chronic disease is different than that in controls. Further research is needed to inform energy requirement recommendations that consider chronic disease. This review was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42022336500 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=336500).

The relationship between trust in federal oversight of vaccine safety and willingness to participate in COVID-19 clinical trials: a repeated measures study of Philadelphia residents (September 2021 - March 2023)

BACKGROUND

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic precipitated an urgent need for clinical trials to discover safe and efficacious treatments. We examined how COVID-19 experiences, clinical trial awareness, and trust in the vaccine safety process were associated with willingness to participate in COVID-19 clinical trials. The objective was to investigate the relationship between trust in federal oversight of vaccine safety and willingness to participate in clinical trials for COVID-19 treatment across four distinct time points over an 18-month period during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We used four waves of data collected from September 2021 to March 2023 among 582 Philadelphia residents (with a missing data rate of 0.9%). Generalized estimating equations estimated the association between willingness to participate in COVID-19 clinical trials and participants' trust in the federal government's oversight of COVID-19 vaccine safety, COVID-19-related variables (COVID-19 related health challenges, history of COVID-19 infection), awareness of clinical trials and how to enroll in them, and sociodemographic characteristics (age, race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, parental status, education, and insurance).

RESULTS

On average, willingness to participate in a COVID-19 clinical trial was positively associated with greater trust in the federal government's oversight of vaccine safety [β = 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.15-0.53], having COVID-19 (β = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.08-0.73), awareness of clinical trials (β = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.04-0.73), and knowledge of how to enroll (β = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.44-1.23). Among sociodemographic characteristics, race/ethnicity (p = 0.001) and gender (p = 0.018) were identified as predictors for COVID-19 trial willingness.

CONCLUSION

Willingness to participate in clinical trials may be bolstered by strengthening the public's trust in the federal government's role within vaccine safety oversight, increasing the perceived relevance of clinical trials to individuals' health and well-being, and offering tailored information to educate diverse communities about ongoing trials and how to enroll in them.

How well do participants in clinical trials represent the U.S. population with chronic neck or back pain?

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for assessing treatment effectiveness; however, they have been criticized for generalizability issues such as how well trial participants represent those who receive the treatments in clinical practice. We assessed the representativeness of participants from eight RCTs for chronic spine pain in the U.S., which were used for an individual participant data meta-analysis on the cost-effectiveness of spinal manipulation for spine pain. In these clinical trials, spinal manipulation was performed by chiropractors.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective secondary analysis of RCT data to compare trial participants' socio-demographic characteristics, clinical features, and health outcomes to a representative sample of (a) U.S. adults with chronic spine pain and (b) U.S. adults with chronic spine pain receiving chiropractic care, using secondary data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). We assessed differences between trial and U.S. spine populations using independent t-tests for means and z-tests for proportions, accounting for the complex multi-stage survey design of the NHIS and MEPS.

RESULTS

We found the clinical trials had an under-representation of individuals from health disparity populations with lower percentages of racial and ethnic minority groups (Black/African American 7% lower, Hispanic 8% lower), less educated (No high school degree 19% lower, high school degree 11% lower), and unemployed adults (25% lower) with worse health outcomes (physical health scores 2.5 lower and mental health scores 5.3 lower using the SF-12/36) relative to the U.S. population with spine pain. While the odds of chiropractic use in the U.S. are lower for individuals from health disparity populations, the trials also under-represented these populations relative to U.S. adults with chronic spine pain who visit a chiropractor.

CONCLUSIONS

Health disparity populations are not well represented in spine pain clinical trials. Embracing key community-based approaches, which have shown promise for increasing participation of underserved communities, is needed.

Clinical trial attitudes among individuals with Alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency

PURPOSE

This study examined characteristics of clinical trials that influence interest in participation among individuals with alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency (AATD).

PROCEDURES

A cross-sectional survey was completed by individuals with AATD. Thirty-four items described characteristics of clinical trials, which were rated from 1 (would not participate) to 5 (highly interested in participating). Logistic regression was used to compare participants with high interest in trials (defined as scores of 4 or 5 on ≥50 % of responses) to all remaining participants.

RESULTS

Data were provided by 1664 participants (91.6 % with lung disease, 16.3 % with liver disease, 14.9 % with lung and liver disease). Nearly one-third (31.8 %) indicated that they would not participate in a trial if there was a chance of getting a placebo. If the trial included three liver biopsies, 53.3 % would not participate. More than two-thirds (69.8 %) of participants who were using augmentation therapy would not participate in a trial that required twelve months off therapy. Individuals with two or more exacerbations in the prior year were more likely to have high interest in trials (OR = 1.4, 95 % CI = 1.1-1.7, p = 0.009). In addition, individuals with a score of 10 or higher on the COPD Assessment Test were more likely to have high interest (OR = 1.4, 95 % CI = 1.1-1.8, p = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

A sizeable percentage of participants indicated that they would not participate in clinical trials that include a placebo, involve multiple liver biopsies, or involve discontinuing augmentation therapy. Individuals who are more affected by AATD have more interest in trial participation than individuals who are less affected.

Integrating Cardio-Oncology Across the Research Pipeline, Policy, and Practice in Australia-An Australian Cardiovascular Alliance Perspective

Over 18 million people worldwide were diagnosed with cancer in 2020, including over 150,000 people in Australia. Although improved early detection and treatment have increased the survival rates, cardiotoxic treatment and inadequate management of cardiovascular risk factors have resulted in cardiovascular disease (CVD) being one of the leading causes of non-cancer-related death and disability among cancer survivors. International guidelines outline the standards of care for CVD risk surveillance and management. However, Australian cardio-oncology policies and clinical guidelines are limited. There is increasing growth of cardio-oncology research in Australia and support from leading Australian professional bodies and advocacy and research networks, including the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand, the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia, the National Heart Foundation of Australia, and the Australian Cardiovascular Alliance (ACvA). Thus, opportunities to drive multidisciplinary cardio-oncology initiatives are growing, including grant funding, position statements, and novel research to inform new policies. The ACvA has a unique flagship structure that spans the translational research pipeline from drug discovery to implementation science. This article aims to highlight how multidisciplinary cardio-oncology innovations could intersect with the seven ACvA flagships, and to showcase Australian achievements in cardio-oncology thus far. We summarise eight key priority areas for future cardio-oncology research that emerged. These strategies will strengthen cardio-oncology research and care in Australia, and drive new guidelines, policies, and government initiatives to ensure equity in health outcomes for all cardio-oncology patients.

An online survey on public awareness of drug clinical trials in inland cities of northern China

Objective

The aims of this survey were to investigate the public awareness of drug clinical trials (DCTs) and willingness to participate the DCTs, and provide references for propaganda and science popularization of DCTs.

Methods

A self-designed questionnaire named "an online survey questionnaire on public awareness of DCTs" was used to conduct an online survey from January to March 2022. The demographic characteristics and the response of participants to the awareness and willingness to participate the DCTs were collected. The factors affecting the public awareness of DCTs were analyzed by single factor and binary logistic regression analysis.

Results

One thousand three hundred eighty valid questionnaires were collected, and the respondents' awareness rate of DCTs was 61.1%. Thirteen demographic characteristics including age, gender, education, occupation, work fields, household type, marital status, city type, income, medical insurance, medical expenditure, pressure to seek medical care, financial pressure, both significantly affected the qualified rate of participants' awareness of DCTs (p < 0.001) by single factor analysis. Binary logistic regression analysis indicated that education level, work fields, city type, medical insurance, and medical expenditure affected independently the participants' awareness rate of DCTs (p < 0.001). 52.9% of the participants were willing to take part in DCTs. "to promote medical progress" (54.4%) or "believe doctors" (31.1%) were the most frequent reasons for subjects participating in DCTs.

Conclusion

The public awareness rate of DCTs and the willingness to participate in drug clinical were significantly affected by the demographic characteristics of subjects. Thus, targeting the needs of the public, propaganda, and science popularization of DCTs should be carried out and served public health.

Trial staff and community member perceptions of barriers and solutions to improving racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trial participation; a mixed method study

Background

The lack of racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trials leads to skewed findings, limited generalizability, inequitable health outcomes for people of color, and insufficient access to innovative therapies. Our objective was to compare perceptions of barriers to participation in trials for people of color and trial staff to provide tangible solutions for improving diversity among study participants.

Methods

This mixed method study utilized semi-structured interviews and surveys to evaluate barriers to participation and solutions to improve racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trials among healthcare system trial staff and community members from the same region. Through thematic analysis via coded transcripts and quantitative analysis via survey data, social support theory constructs were identified to evaluate where perceptions of barriers and solutions overlap and where they diverge.

Results

A total of 55 trial staff and 75 community members participated in the study. Trial staff identified logistics and patients' unwillingness to receive additional treatments as perceived barriers to participation, while community members stated lack of information and lack of trust in their care team. Both groups identified hesitance toward research as a prominent barrier. Solutions related to informational support demonstrated the most overlap between groups, while instrumental support showed the most discordance.

Conclusion

Solutions for improving racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trial participation are multi-faceted and have various levels of impact. Overlap and discordance of opinions regarding solutions should be further evaluated, and implementation of solutions should be carefully considered.

Understanding the inclusion and participation of adults from Black African Diaspora Communities (BAFDC) in health and care research in the UK: a realist review protocol

INTRODUCTION

People from Black African Diaspora Communities (BAFDC) experience poorer health outcomes, have many long-term conditions and are persistently under-represented in health and care research. There is limited focus on programmes, or interventions that support inclusion and participation of people from BAFDC in research. Through coproduction, this realist review seeks to provide a programme theory explaining what context and mechanisms may be required, to produce outcomes that facilitate inclusion and participation for people from BAFDC in health and care research, in the UK.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A group of people from BAFDC with lived and professional experience, representing all levels of the health and care research system, will coproduce a realist review with a team of African-Caribbean, white British and white British of Polish origin health and care researchers. They will follow Pawson's five steps: (1) shaping the scope of the review; (2) searching for evidence; (3) document selection and appraisal; (4) data extraction and (5) data synthesis. The coproduction group will help to map the current landscape, identifying key issues that may inhibit or facilitate inclusion. Data will be extracted, analysed and synthesised following realist logic analysis, identifying and explaining how context and mechanisms are conceptualised in the literature and the types of contextual factors that exist and impact on inclusion and participation. Findings will be reported in accordance with Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis Evolving Standards .

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The coproduction group will agree an ethical approach considering accountability, responsibility and power dynamics, by establishing a terms of reference, taking a reflexive approach and coproducing an ethical framework. Findings will be disseminated to BAFDC and the research community through arts-based methods, peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations, agreeing a coproduced strategy for dissemination. Ethical review is not required.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42024517124.

Recruitment and retention of clinical trial participants: understanding motivations of patients with chronic pain and other populations

This paper aims to present and discuss the issues, challenges, and strategies related to recruitment and retention in clinical trials involving participants with chronic pain. The randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) is widely regarded as the gold standard for evaluating clinical interventions. However, it is crucial to acknowledge and address the challenges associated with recruiting and retaining participants. To prioritize the experience of the study population, targeted outreach strategies and a patient-centric approach are necessary. Researchers should consider incorporating recruitment and retention strategies during the study design phase. Implementing multi-pronged recruitment methods, leveraging relationships with community providers, and involving representatives of the patient population are helpful approaches. Effective communication and maintaining a professional environment are vital for optimizing engagement and supporting the successful execution of clinical trials involving participants with chronic pain.

Exploring patient-reported barriers to participating in proton therapy clinical trials

Introduction

Clinical trials lead the progress in healthcare. To ensure reliable research conclusions, it is essential to enroll diverse patient groups. Identifying and understanding patient-reported barriers to clinical trials may help enhance recruitment among diverse patient groups.The clinical potential of proton therapy (PT) to reduce late effects is being investigated in clinical trials worldwide. Thus, for some patients, PT is only accessible by participating in clinical trials.Individuals with smoking-related head and neck cancer (HNC) are sometimes socioeconomically deprived, leading to barriers to trial participation. This study aims to identify barriers to their participation in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) involving PT.

Method

Interviews were conducted with 14 HNC patients declining participation in an RCT involving PT. The interviews were transcribed and systematically analysed using an inductive approach identifying categories and themes.

Results

The identified barriers to RCT-participation are: (1) existential distress, which influenced participants' mental and cognitive capacities, (2) insufficient RCT-related knowledge arising from information overload during clinical consultations, (3) the wish for safety and familiarity during the treatment trajectory, particularly for participants needing accommodation during  radiotherapy, and (4) the motivation for study participation was impacted by uncertainty due to randomisation and clinical equipoise. Existential distress is identified as an overarching theme because it influences and amplifies the other three themes.

Conclusion

Existential distress is a central theme that influences and amplifies other participation barriers in PT RCTs. It affects participants' comprehension of trial information, their preference for familiar environments, and their motivation to participate in clinical trials.

Perspectives of adults with neurofibromatosis regarding the design of psychosocial trials: Results from an anonymous online survey

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Individuals with neurofibromatosis, including neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1), neurofibromatosis 2 (NF2)-related schwannomatosis (SWN), and other forms of SWN, often experience disease manifestations and mental health difficulties for which psychosocial interventions may help. An anonymous online survey of adults with neurofibromatosis assessed their physical, social, and emotional well-being and preferences about psychosocial interventions to inform clinical trial design.

METHODS

Neurofibromatosis clinical researchers and patient representatives from the Response Evaluation in Neurofibromatosis and Schwannomatosis International Collaboration developed the survey. Eligibility criteria included age ≥ 18 years, self-reported diagnosis of NF1, NF2, or SWN, and ability to read and understand English. The online survey was distributed internationally by the Neurofibromatosis Registry and other neurofibromatosis foundations from June to August 2020.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed by 630 adults (18-81 years of age; M = 45.5) with NF1 (78%), NF2 (14%), and SWN (8%) who were mostly White, not Hispanic/Latino, female, and from the United States. The majority (91%) reported that their neurofibromatosis symptoms had at least some impact on daily life. In the total sample, 51% endorsed a mental health diagnosis, and 27% without a diagnosis believed they had an undiagnosed mental health condition. Participants indicated that neurofibromatosis affected their emotional (44%), physical (38%), and social (35%) functioning to a high degree. Few reported ever having participated in a drug (6%) or psychosocial (7%) clinical trial, yet 68% reported they "probably" or "definitely" would want to participate in a psychosocial trial if it targeted a relevant concern. Top treatment targets were anxiety, healthier lifestyle, and daily stress. Top barriers to participating in psychosocial trials were distance to clinic, costs, and time commitment. Respondents preferred interventions delivered by clinicians via individual sessions or a combination of group and individual sessions, with limited in-person and mostly remote participation. There were no significant group differences by neurofibromatosis type in willingness to participate in psychosocial trials (p = 0.27). Regarding interest in intervention targets, adults with SWN were more likely to prefer psychosocial trials for pain support compared to those with NF1 (p < 0.001) and NF2 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study conducted the largest survey assessing physical symptoms, mental health needs, and preferences for psychosocial trials in adults with neurofibromatosis. Results indicate a high prevalence of disease manifestations, psychosocial difficulties, and untreated mental health problems in adults with neurofibromatosis and a high degree of willingness to participate in psychosocial clinical trials. Patient preferences should be considered when designing and implementing psychosocial interventions to develop the most feasible and meaningful studies.

Digital health interventions for all? Examining inclusivity across all stages of the digital health intervention research process

Digital interventions offer many possibilities for improving health, as remote interventions can enhance reach and access to underserved groups of society. However, research evaluating digital health interventions demonstrates that such technologies do not equally benefit all and that some in fact seem to reinforce a "digital health divide." By better understanding these potential pitfalls, we may contribute to narrowing the digital divide in health promotion. The aim of this article is to highlight and reflect upon study design decisions that might unintentionally enhance inequities across key research stages-recruitment, enrollment, engagement, efficacy/effectiveness, and retention. To address the concerns highlighted, we propose strategies including (1) the standard definition of "effectiveness" should be revised to include a measure of inclusivity; (2) studies should report a broad range of potential inequity indicators of participants recruited, randomized, and retained and should conduct sensitivity analyses examining potential sociodemographic differences for both the effect and engagement of the digital interventions; (3) participants from historically marginalized groups should be involved in the design of study procedures, including those related to recruitment, consent, intervention implementation and engagement, assessment, and retention; (4) eligibility criteria should be minimized and carefully selected and the screening process should be streamlined; (5) preregistration of trials should include recruitment benchmarks for sample diversity and comprehensive lists of sociodemographic characteristics assessed; and (6) studies within trials should be embedded to systematically test recruitment and retention strategies to improve inclusivity. The implementation of these strategies would enhance the ability of digital health trials to recruit, randomize, engage, and retain a broader and more representative population in trials, ultimately minimizing the digital divide and broadly improving population health.

A pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial of bone antiresorptive agents on bone turnover markers in critically ill women

Critical illness is associated with increased bone turnover, loss of bone density, and increased risk of fragility fractures. The impact of bone antiresorptive agents in this population is not established. This trial examined the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of antiresorptive agents administered to critically ill women aged fifty years or greater. Women aged 50 years or greater admitted to an intensive care unit for at least 24 h were randomised to receive an antiresorptive agent (zoledronic acid or denosumab) or placebo, during critical illness and six months later (denosumab only). Bone turnover markers and bone mineral density (BMD) were monitored for 1 year. We studied 18 patients over 35 months before stopping the study due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Antiresorptive medications decreased the bone turnover marker type 1 cross-linked c-telopeptide (CTX) from day 0 to 28 by 43% (± 40%), compared to an increase of 26% (± 55%) observed with placebo (absolute difference - 69%, 95% CI - 127% to - 11%), p = 0.03). Mixed linear modelling revealed differences in the month after trial drug administration between the groups in serum CTX, alkaline phosphatase, parathyroid hormone, and phosphate. Change in BMD between antiresorptive and placebo groups was not statistically analysed due to small numbers. No serious adverse events were recorded. In critically ill women aged 50-years and over, antiresorptive agents suppressed bone resorption markers without serious adverse events. However, recruitment was slow. Further phase 2 trials examining the efficacy of these agents are warranted and should address barriers to enrolment.Trial registration: ACTRN12617000545369, registered 18th April 2017.

Strategies for enhancing the representation of women in clinical trials: an evidence map

BACKGROUND

Equitable sex- and gender-based representation in clinical trials is an essential step to ensuring evidence-based care for women. While multi-institutional actions have led to significant improvements in the inclusion of women in trials, inequity persists in areas like sex-neutral cancers and cardiovascular disease. We sought to identify strategies described or evaluated to boost the inclusion of women in clinical trials.

METHODS

We used evidence mapping methodology to examine the breadth of relevant literature. We developed an a priori protocol and followed reporting guidance from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis where applicable. We searched MEDLINE® (via PubMed) and EMBASE (via Elsevier) databases from inception through April 4, 2023, and used standardized procedures incorporating duplication and data verification. We included articles that described strategies to improve the recruitment and retention of women in clinical trials.

RESULTS

We identified 122 articles describing recruitment and retention strategies for 136 trials (377,595 women). Only one article distinguished between the sex and gender identity of participants, and none defined their use of the terms such as "women" or "female". The majority of articles (95%) described recruitment for only women, and 64% were conducted in the USA. Ninety-two articles (75%) described strategies in the context of sex-specific conditions (e.g., gynecologic diagnosis). The majority of included articles evaluated a behavioral intervention (52%), with 23% evaluating pharmacologic interventions and 4% invasive interventions. The most common trial phase for reported strategies was during outreach to potential participants (116 articles), followed by intervention delivery (76), enrollment (40), outcomes assessment (21), analysis and interpretation (3), and dissemination (4). We describe specific types of strategies within each of these phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the existing literature describing strategies to improve the inclusion of women draws from trials for sex-specific conditions and is largely related to outreach to potential participants. There is little information about how and if studies have attempted to proportionally increase the inclusion of women in trials with both men and women or those focused on invasive and pharmacologic interventions. Future work in this area should focus on how to increase the participation of women in mixed-sex studies and on those areas with remaining inequities in trial participation.

Precision Recruitment and Engagement of Individuals at Risk for Diabetes and Hypertension in Clinical Trials (PREDHICT): A Randomized Trial for an E-Persuasive Mobile Application to Inform Decision Making about Clinical Trials

The primary objective of this randomized trial was to test the effectiveness of the PREDHiCT digital application, which provides educational and supportive navigation to increase willingness to participate in a future clinical trial. The second objective was to test whether PREDHiCT increased clinical trial literacy or enhanced psychological facilitators of clinical trial participation, such as altruism. To test these two objectives, we conducted a 1-month remote decentralized trial with 100 participants who either have a personal or family history of cardiometabolic health conditions, such as hypertension, diabetes, and obesity. Results indicated significant changes in altruism (mean: -2.94 vs. 0.83; p-value = 0.011) and clinical trial literacy (mean: 0.55 vs. 2.59; p-value = 0.001) from baseline to 1-month follow-up between the control and intervention groups. Additionally, participants exposed to personalized clinical trial navigation had greater clinical trial literacy at the end of the study relative to the individuals in the control arm of the study. Our findings indicate that tailored education, navigation, and access to clinical trials-three unique features of our PREDHiCT app-increased altruism and clinical trial literacy but not willingness to participate in a trial.

Development and validation of Join Clinical Trial Questionnaire (JoinCT)

AIM

Participant recruitment has always been a major challenge in clinical trials. This study aimed to develop and validate the Join Clinical Trial Questionnaire (JoinCT), exploring the willingness to join a clinical trial and associated factors in patients.

METHODS

This questionnaire development study involved four phases: (i) exploring and understanding the subject matter, (ii) questionnaire development, (iii) content validity testing, and lastly, (iv) field-testing of the questionnaire. For the field-testing phase, a cross-sectional self-administered survey of JoinCT was conducted among cancer patients with various socio-demographic backgrounds and medical conditions. Besides content validity, Cronbach's alpha was used to evaluate the internal consistency of domains, and confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the model fit of the JoinCT framework.

RESULTS

A total of 389 respondents participated in the survey. Based on the results obtained from a field data collection phase, JoinCT consisted of four independent variables domains, namely "knowledge", "perception of benefits", "perception of risks", and "confidence". The only dependent variable was the willingness to participate in a clinical trial. The minimum Cronbach's alpha was 0.937, and the model fit for the overall framework of JoinCT is also excellent with Comparative Fit Index (> 0.90), root mean square error approximation (< 0.08), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (< 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

The Join Clinical Trial Questionnaire (JoinCT) was successfully validated with excellent reliability and validity, and a good model fit. The main factors that contribute to willingness to participate in clinical trials are knowledge, perception of benefits, perception of risks, and confidence.

Recruitment methods and yield rates for a multisite clinical trial exploring risk reduction for Alzheimer's disease (rrAD)

INTRODUCTION

The risk reduction for Alzheimer's disease (rrAD) trial was a multisite clinical trial to assess exercise and intensive vascular pharmacological treatment on cognitive function in community-dwelling older adults at increased risk for Alzheimer's disease.

METHODS

Eligibility, consent, and randomization rates across different referral sources were compared. Informal interviews conducted with each site's project team were conducted upon study completion.

RESULTS

Initially, 3290 individuals were screened, of whom 28% were eligible to consent, 805 consented to participate (87.2% of those eligible), and 513 (36.3% of those consented) were randomized. Emails sent from study site listservs/databases yielded the highest amount (20.9%) of screened individuals. Professional referrals from physicians yielded the greatest percentage of consented individuals (57.1%). Referrals from non-professional contacts (ie, friends, family; 75%) and mail/phone contact from a site (73.8%) had the highest yield of randomization.

DISCUSSION

Professional referrals or email from listservs/registries were most effective for enrolling participants. The greatest yield of eligible/randomized participants came from non-professional and mail/phone contacts. Future trials should consider special efforts targeting these recruitment approaches.

Highlights

Clinical trial recruitment is commonly cited as a significant barrier to advancing our understanding of cognitive health interventions.The most cited referral source was email, followed by interviews/editorials on the radio, television, local newspapers, newsletters, or magazine articles.The referral method that brought in the largest number of contacts was email but did not result in the greatest yield of consents or eligible participants.The sources that yielded the greatest likelihood of consent were professional referrals (ie, physician), social media, and mail/phone contact from study site.The greatest yield of eligible/randomized participants came from non-professional contacts and mail/phone contact from a site.Findings suggest that sites may need to focus on more selective referral sources, such as using contact mailing and phone lists, rather than more widely viewed recruitment sources, such as social media or TV/radio advertisements.

Data-Driven and Technology-Enabled Trial Innovations Toward Decentralization of Clinical Trials: Opportunities and Considerations

Traditional trial designs have well-recognized inefficiencies and logistical barriers to participation. Decentralized trials and digital health solutions have been suggested as potential solutions and have certainly risen to the challenge during the pandemic. Clinical trial designs are now increasingly data driven. The use of distributed clinical data networks and digitization has helped to fundamentally upgrade existing research systems. A trial design may vary anywhere from fully decentralized to hybrid to traditional on-site. Various decentralization components are available for stakeholders to increase the reach and pace of their trials, such as electronic informed consent, remote interviews, administration, outcome assessment, monitoring, and laboratory and imaging modalities. Furthermore, digital health technologies can be included to enrich study conduct. However, careful consideration is warranted, including assessing verification and validity through usability studies and having various contingencies in place through dedicated risk assessment. Selecting the right combination depends not just on the ability to handle patient care and the medical know-how but also on the availability of appropriate technologic infrastructure, skills, and human resources. Throughout this process, quality of evidence generation and physician-patient relation must not be undermined. Here we also address some knowledge gaps, cost considerations, and potential impact of decentralization and digitization on inclusivity, recruitment, engagement, and retention. Last, we mention some future directions that may help drive the necessary change in the right direction.

Barriers and facilitators to recruitment of underrepresented research participants: Perspectives of clinical research coordinators

Background

Insufficient recruitment of groups underrepresented in medical research threatens the generalizability of research findings and compounds inequity in research and medicine. In the present study, we examined barriers and facilitators to recruitment of underrepresented research participants from the perspective of clinical research coordinators (CRCs).

Methods

CRCs from one adult and one pediatric academic medical centers completed an online survey in April-May 2022. Survey topics included: participant language and translations, cultural competency training, incentives for research participation, study location, and participant research literacy. CRCs also reported their success in recruiting individuals from various backgrounds and completed an implicit bias measure.

Results

Surveys were completed by 220 CRCs. CRCs indicated that recruitment is improved by having translated study materials, providing incentives to compensate participants, and reducing the number of in-person study visits. Most CRCs had completed some form of cultural competency training, but most also felt that the training either had no effect or made them feel less confident in approaching prospective participants from backgrounds different than their own. In general, CRCs reported having greater success in recruiting prospective participants from groups that are not underrepresented in research. Results of the implicit bias measure did not indicate that bias was associated with intentions to approach a prospective participant.

Conclusions

CRCs identified several strategies to improve recruitment of underrepresented research participants, and CRC insights aligned with insights from research participants in previous work. Further research is needed to understand the impact of cultural competency training on recruitment of underrepresented research participants.

Recruiting experiences of NIH-funded principal investigators for community-based health behavior interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic

Successful recruitment into randomized trials and interventions is essential to advance scientific knowledge to improve health. This rapid assessment study explored how the COVID-19 pandemic affected participant recruitment overall, identified how it exacerbated existing challenges to recruit hard-to-reach populations, and described how NIH-funded Principal Investigators (PIs) responded to COVID-era recruitment challenges. A cross-sectional survey of NIH-funded PIs conducting interventions and trials related to health behaviors was conducted in 2022. The survey was completed by 52 PIs, most of whom were highly experienced in this type of research. Eighteen PIs reported it was very difficult to recruit participants now (39.1%) compared to before COVID-19 when only one did (2.2%). PIs reported changing recruitment and data collection methods (29.4%), increasing staff dedicated to recruitment (29.4%), and increasing participant compensation (23.5%). Recruitment methods shifted from in-person activities to social media and other electronic communications. Barriers to recruitment included reluctance to participate in research, COVID-19 protocols and precautions, overwhelmed community partners, staff burnout and turnover, and limited access to technology for some populations that were already hard to reach. Facilitators to recruitment consisted of increased access and ability to use remote technologies, use of social media, strong community ties, and wanting to be part of something positive. PIs perceived recruitment as much more difficult after the onset of COVID-19, though research teams were able to pivot to more online and remote options. These tools may have a lasting impact in modernizing recruitment, data collection, and intervention techniques in future trials.

How do parents access, appraise, and apply health information on early childhood allergy prevention? A focus group and interview study

Background

When parents want to make health-related decisions for their child, they need to be able to handle health information from a potentially endless range of sources. Early childhood allergy prevention (ECAP) is a good example: recommendations have shifted from allergen avoidance to early introduction of allergenic foods. We investigated how parents of children under 3 years old access, appraise and apply health information about ECAP, and their respective needs and preferences.

Methods

We conducted 23 focus groups and 24 interviews with 114 parents of children with varied risk for allergies. The recruitment strategy and a topic guide were co-designed with the target group and professionals from public health, education, and medicine. Data were mostly collected via video calls, recorded and then transcribed verbatim. Content analysis according to Kuckartz was performed using MAXQDA and findings are presented as a descriptive overview.

Results

Parents most frequently referred to family members, friends, and other parents as sources of ECAP information, as well as healthcare professionals (HCPs), particularly pediatricians. Parents said that they exchanged experiences and practices with their peers, while relying on HCPs for guidance on decision-making. When searching for information online, they infrequently recalled the sources used and were rarely aware of providers of "good" health information. While parents often reported trying to identify the authors of information to appraise its reliability, they said they did not undertake more comprehensive information quality checks. The choice and presentation of ECAP information was frequently criticized by all parent groups; in particular, parents of at-risk children or with a manifested allergy were often dissatisfied with HCP consultations, and hence did not straightforwardly apply advice. Though many trusted their HCPs, parents often reported taking preventive measures based on their own intuition.

Conclusion

One suggestion to react upon the many criticisms expressed by parents regarding who and how provides ECAP information is to integrate central ECAP recommendations into regular child care counseling by HCPs-provided that feasible ways for doing so are identified. This would assist disease prevention, as parents without specific concerns are often unaware of the ECAP dimension of issues such as nutrition.

Recruitment to a trial of antipsychotic reduction: impact of an acceptability study

OBJECTIVES

Pre-trial acceptability studies may boost recruitment, especially in trials comparing distinctly different interventions. We evaluated the impact of an acceptability study on recruitment to a randomised trial of antipsychotic reduction versus maintenance treatment and explored demographic and clinical predictors of subsequent enrolment.

METHODS

Participants with a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder who were taking antipsychotic medication were interviewed about their views of taking part in a future trial.

RESULTS

In a sample of 210 participants, 151 (71.9%) expressed an interest in taking part in the future trial, 16 (7.6%) said they might be interested, and 43 (20.5%) said they were not. Altruistic reasons were most commonly given for wanting to take part, and concern about randomisation for not wanting to. Ultimately 57 people enrolled in the trial (27.1% of the original sample). Eighty-five people who initially expressed an interest did not enrol due to declining or not being eligible (for clinical reasons). Women and people from a white ethnic background were more likely to enrol in the trial, but no illness or treatment-related characteristics were associated with enrolment.

CONCLUSION

An acceptability study can be a useful tool for recruitment to challenging trials, but it may over-estimate recruitment.

Diversity in clinical research: public health and social justice imperatives

It is well established that demographic representation in clinical research is important for understanding the safety and effectiveness of novel therapeutics and vaccines in diverse patient populations. In recent years, the National Institutes of Health and Food and Drug Administration have issued guidelines and recommendations for the inclusion of women, older adults, and racial and ethnic minorities in research. However, these guidelines fail to provide an adequate explanation of why racial and ethnic representation in clinical research is important. This article aims to both provide the missing arguments for why adequate representation of racial and ethnic minorities in clinical research is essential and to articulate a number of recommendations for improving diversity going forward.Appropriate racial and ethnic representation and fair inclusion help (1) increase the generalisability of clinical trial results, (2) equitably distribute any benefits of clinical research and (3) enable trust in the research enterprise.

Diversity among research coordinators in a pediatric emergency medicine research collaborative network

We conducted a survey study of clinical research coordinators (CRCs) at the member institutions of the Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network, to determine the demographic and linguistic characteristics of CRCs around the network, and any perceived impact of those characteristics on their duties. A total of 53/74 CRCs completed the survey. Most respondents identified as "female," "white," and "not Hispanic/Latino." Most respondents felt that their race/ethnicity and their ability to speak a language other than English would positively impact recruitment. Four female respondents felt that their gender hindered their recruitment efforts and their sense of belonging within the research team.

Intentional and actional components of engaged participation in public health research studies: qualitative synthesis of a recruitment and retention process into the theory-informed INTACT-RS framework

BACKGROUND

Ensuring motivated and successful study participation is a key challenge in the design and conduct of health research studies. Previously, recruitment barriers and facilitators have been identified mainly from experience, and rarely based on theoretical approaches. We developed a framework of intentional and actional components of engaged participation in public health research studies (INTACT-RS), informed by psychological behavioral models. We aimed a) to identify precise indicators for each framework component and b) to better understand which components and decision processes are essential for study participants.

METHODS

Within a multicenter research network, we applied various approaches to recruit parents of newborns, pediatricians, and midwives. All recruitment processes were documented from the perspective of both participants and researchers. We used different qualitative and quantitative data material, which we applied in a multistage process according to the basic principles of qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

INTACT-RS encompasses pre-intentional, intentional and actional phases with a total of n = 15 components covering all aspects of an individual's involvement with a research study. During intention formation, an understanding of efforts and benefits, why participation is valuable beyond contributing to research, and how others perceive the study, were particularly important to (potential) participants. Subsequently (intentional phase), participants consider how and when participation is compatible with their own resources, ability and availability, and hence seek for close communication with, and flexibility and support from the research team. During and after (initial) participation (actional phase), participants' assessment of whether expectations and interests have been met impact crucial further steps, especially the willingness to continue and to recommend participation to others. A strong topic-wise and or supportive participation interest as well as active, continuous exchange with the researchers appeared to be central determinants of study completion and data validity.

CONCLUSIONS

A theoretical framework is now available to plan and conduct recruitment of different target groups, which accounts for essential motivational and volitional decision-making processes. Based on empirically specified constructs, possible barriers can be addressed even before the initial recruitment process. Therefore, recommendations for scientific practice have been formulated.

Development and Validation of the Perceptions of Research Trustworthiness Scale to Measure Trust Among Minoritized Racial and Ethnic Groups in Biomedical Research in the US

IMPORTANCE

Historically, trust in biomedical research has been lower among minoritized racial and ethnic groups who are underrepresented in and excluded from research, with the same groups experiencing worse health outcomes. Unfortunately, instruments that measure trust may not capture components of trust relevant to minoritized racial and ethnic groups.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a scale to measure trust in biomedical research among minoritized racial and ethnic groups.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional, community-based survey study compared trust and distrust in biomedical research among Black, Latino, and White subgroups in the US using the Perceptions of Research Trustworthiness (PoRT) scale. The scale was developed between March 22, 2016, and September 19, 2018, as part of this study, and its structure, reliability, and validity were examined during pilot (n = 381) and validation (n = 532) phases between February 4, 2019, and July 27, 2021. Convenience samples of adult participants (aged ≥18 years) were recruited locally (Nashville, Tennessee, and San Antonio, Texas) and nationally through the ResearchMatch and Cint online platforms.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Overall and individual item Trust and Distrust subscale scores were compared. Overall Trust and Distrust scores were compared by race and ethnicity using a Kruskal-Wallis H test and individual item scores were compared using independent samples t test.

RESULTS

Of the 532 participants in the scale validation study, 144 (27.1%) were Black, 90 (16.9%) were Latino, and 282 (53.0%) were White. Participants had a median age of 43 years (range, 18-90 years), 352 (66.2%) were women, and 198 (37.2%) had educational attainment levels less than a college degree. Factor analysis of the 18-item PoRT scale revealed a 2-factor structure with two 9-item PoRT subscales (Trust and Distrust), which demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.72 and 0.87, respectively). Mean (SD) Trust subscale scores were lower among Black (34.33 [2.02]) and Latino (34.55 [1.97]) participants compared with White participants (36.32 [1.81]; P < .001). Mean (SD) Distrust subscale scores were higher among Black (21.0 [2.15]) and Latino (20.53 [2.21]) participants compared with White participants (18.4 [2.03]; P < .001). Individual item results showed that Black and Latino participants were less trusting and more distrusting than White individuals on items related to risks, harms, secrecy, confidentiality, and privacy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that the PoRT scale incorporates trust and trustworthiness concepts relevant among Black and Latino individuals and may allow more precise assessment of trust in research among these groups.

Applying mixed methods to pilot feasibility studies to inform intervention trials

BACKGROUND

Pilot feasibility studies serve a uniquely important role in preparing for larger scale intervention trials by examining the feasibility and acceptability of interventions and the methods used to test them. Mixed methods (collecting, analyzing, and integrating quantitative and qualitative data and results) can optimize what can be learned from pilot feasibility studies to prepare rigorous intervention trials. Despite increasing use of mixed method designs in intervention trials, there is limited guidance on how to apply these approaches to address pilot feasibility study goals. The purpose of this article is to offer methodological guidance for how investigators can plan to integrate quantitative and qualitative methods within pilot feasibility studies to comprehensively address key research questions.

METHODS

We used an informal consensus-based process informed by key methodological resources and our team's complementary expertise as intervention researchers and mixed methodologists to develop guidance for applying mixed methods to optimize what can be learned from pilot feasibility studies. We developed this methodological guidance as faculty in the Mixed Methods Research Training Program (MMRTP) for the Health Sciences (R25MH104660) funded by the National Institutes of Health through the Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research.

RESULTS

We provide the following guidance for applying mixed methods to optimize pilot feasibility studies: (1) identify feasibility domain(s) that will be examined using mixed methods, (2) align quantitative and qualitative data sources for the domain(s) selected for mixing methods, (3) determine the timing of the quantitative and qualitative data collection within the flow of the pilot study, (4) plan integrative analyses using joint displays to understand feasibility, and (5) prepare to draw meta-inferences about feasibility and implications for the future trial from the integrated data.

CONCLUSIONS

By effectively integrating quantitative and qualitative data within pilot feasibility studies, investigators can harness the potential of mixed methods for developing comprehensive and nuanced understandings about feasibility. Our guidance can help researchers to consider the range of key decisions needed during intervention pilot feasibility testing to achieve a rigorous mixed methods approach generating enhanced insights to inform future intervention trials.

The efficacy of family treatments for adolescent anorexia nervosa in specialist versus non-specialist settings: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anorexia nervosa (AN) is often diagnosed in adolescence, and most evidence-based treatments for AN in young people involve the family. Family therapies for AN are intensive, outpatient treatments that utilise the parents as the primary resource in the young person's recovery. Research regarding family treatment for AN is often conducted in specialist settings-with relatively little data reporting the translation of this specialised treatment into real-world, non-specialist settings. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the efficacy of family treatments for adolescents with AN in specialist settings versus non-specialist settings.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Retrospective cohort studies, pilot studies, case series, randomised controlled trials and qualitative investigations that present original data and investigated the efficacy of family treatments for adolescents with AN in either a specialist or non-specialist setting will be included in the review. Data will be extracted by two reviewers and study quality will be assessed. The primary outcome, change in weight, will be used to determine via meta-analysis and, depending on study heterogeneity, subgroup analysis or meta-regression whether there is a statistically significant subgroup difference between specialist and non-specialist treatment settings. The review will also consider changes in eating disorder symptomology and related constructs.

DISCUSSION

Results from this review will help determine if there is a difference in the efficacy of family treatments for adolescent AN in specialist versus non-specialist treatment settings, primarily in relation to weight recovery. This, in turn, will inform the translation of evidence-based interventions that are generally studied and implemented within specialist centres into the non-specialist health care system.

Generalizability and reach of a randomized controlled trial to improve oral health among home care recipients: comparing participants and nonparticipants at baseline and during follow-up

Background

The generalizability of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a low response can be limited by systematic differences between participants and nonparticipants. This participation bias, however, is rarely investigated because data on nonparticipants is usually not available. The purpose of this article is to compare all participants and nonparticipants of a RCT to improve oral health among home care recipients at baseline and during follow-up using claims data.

Methods

Seven German statutory health and long-term care insurance funds invited 9656 home care recipients to participate in the RCT MundPflege. Claims data for all participants (n = 527, 5.5% response) and nonparticipants (n = 9129) were analyzed. Associations between trial participation and sex, age, care dependency, number of Elixhauser diseases, and dementia, as well as nursing, medical, and dental care utilization at baseline, were investigated using multivariable logistic regression. Associations between trial participation and the probability of (a) moving into a nursing home, (b) being hospitalized, and (c) death during 1 year of follow-up were examined via Cox proportional hazards regressions, controlling for baseline variables.

Results

At baseline, trial participation was positively associated with male sex (odds ratio 1.29 [95% confidence interval 1.08–1.54]), high (vs. low 1.46 [1.15–1.86]) care dependency, receiving occasional in-kind benefits to relieve caring relatives (1.45 [1.15–1.84]), having a referral by a general practitioner to a medical specialist (1.62 [1.21–2.18]), and dental care utilization (2.02 [1.67–2.45]). It was negatively associated with being 75–84 (vs. < 60 0.67 [0.50–0.90]) and 85 + (0.50 [0.37–0.69]) years old. For morbidity, hospitalizations, and formal, respite, short-term, and day or night care, no associations were found. During follow-up, participants were less likely to move into a nursing home than nonparticipants (hazard ratio 0.50 [0.32–0.79]). For hospitalizations and mortality, no associations were found.

Conclusions

For half of the comparisons, differences between participants and nonparticipants were observed. The RCT’s generalizability is limited, but to a smaller extent than one would expect because of the low response. Routine data provide a valuable source for investigating potential differences between trial participants and nonparticipants, which might be used by future RCTs to evaluate the generalizability of their findings.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00013517. Retrospectively registered on June 11, 2018.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06470-y.

Recruitment and Retention Strategies for the Diabetes RElated to Acute Pancreatitis and Its Mechanisms Study: From the Type 1 Diabetes in Acute Pancreatitis Consortium

ABSTRACT

Recruitment and retention of patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) in clinical studies can be challenging. While some obstacles are similar to other clinical conditions, some are unique to AP. Identifying potential barriers early and developing targeted solutions can help optimize recruitment and retention in AP studies. Such pre-emptive and detailed planning can help prospective, longitudinal studies focus on exocrine and endocrine complications of AP in accurately measuring outcomes. This article highlights the challenges in recruitment and retention strategies in AP studies and reviews available resources to create opportunities to address them. We describe the multifaceted approach used by the Recruitment and Retention Committee of the Type 1 Diabetes in Acute Pancreatitis Consortium, which builds upon earlier experiences to develop a recruitment and retention plan for the DREAM (Diabetes RElated to Acute pancreatitis and its Mechanisms) study.

Opportunities and counterintuitive challenges for decentralized clinical trials to broaden participant inclusion

Traditional clinical trials have often failed to recruit representative participant populations. Just 5% of eligible patients participate in clinical research. Participants, particularly those from minority groups, cite geographical constraints, mistrust, miscommunication, and discrimination as barriers. Here, an intersectional view of inclusion in clinical trials provides significant insights into the complex and counterintuitive challenges of trial design and participant recruitment. The US FDA have recently proposed that decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) might reduce barriers and appeal to a wider range of participants by reducing the costs and commitments required for patients to participate. While common sense and early evidence suggests that allowing participants to take part in trials at or near home has advantages in terms of convenience, travel, and perhaps even infection control, it remains to be seen if DCT approaches will yield significant improvements on participant inclusivity. Some digital studies aiming to be more inclusive on a single element of inclusion, such as race, have experienced unintended consequences in other elements, like education or gender. Implementing DCTs presents new challenges including the digital divide, the exclusion of certain tests and procedures, complexities of at-home medication delivery, and the need to build new infrastructure. We present a range of challenges and opportunities for researchers to adopt and adapt DCT approaches to create reliable evidence that applies to all of us.

Considerations for clinical trial design and conduct in the evaluation of novel advanced therapeutics in neurodegenerative disease

The recent advances in the development of potentially disease modifying cell and gene therapies for neurodegenerative disease has resulted in the production of a number of promising novel therapies which are now moving forward to clinical evaluation. The robust evaluation of these therapies pose a significant number of challenges when compared to more traditional evaluations of pharmacotherapy, which is the current mainstay of neurodegenerative disease symptom management. Indeed, there is an inherent complexity in the design and conduct of these trials at multiple levels. Here we discuss specific aspects requiring consideration in the context of investigating novel cell and gene therapies for neurodegenerative disease. This extends to overarching trial designs that could be employed and the factors that underpin design choices such outcome assessments, participant selection and methods for delivery of cell and gene therapies. We explore methods of data collection that may improve efficiency in trials of cell and gene therapy to maximize data sharing and collaboration. Lastly, we explore some of the additional context beyond efficacy evaluations that should be considered to ensure implementation across relevant healthcare settings.