A Qualitative Study of Phase III Cancer Clinical Trial Enrollment Decision-Making: Perspectives from Adolescents, Young Adults, Caregivers, and Providers
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: The mortality reduction rate for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer has not demonstrated the same rate of improvement as for children, due partly to insufficient phase III cancer clinical trial enrollment. This study describes three key components of phase III cancer clinical trial enrollment—family decision-making patterns, factors that influence AYAs' involvement, and attitudes (perceived barriers and benefits) toward trial participation—and evaluated a measure of attitudes. Methods: Participants were AYAs (15–23 years old at study) diagnosed with cancer and offered a phase III cancer clinical trial within the past 3–21 months, their primary caregivers, and their healthcare providers. Interviews assessed: (a) phase III clinical trial decision-making experiences and (b) relevance of the Pediatric Research Participation Questionnaire (PRPQ) in the assessment of AYAs' attitudes toward enrollment on phase III cancer clinical trials. Results: Thirteen AYAs, 16 caregivers, and 11 providers were interviewed. Four decision-making patterns were identified, with AYA abdicates to caregiver and caregiver-based and AYA-endorsed the most commonly described, but with variation across respondents. Distress and reduced health-related quality of life limited AYAs' involvement in the enrollment decision, while developmental and emotional maturity facilitated involvement. Perceived barriers and benefits to enrollment were reported, and the PRPQ was deemed relevant with minor modifications. Conclusions: Findings suggest that AYAs may not be fully involved in phase III cancer clinical trial enrollment decision-making, and caregivers and providers are challenged to overcome factors that limit their involvement. The PRPQ shows promise as a tool for systematically evaluating clinical trial attitudes.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Qualitative analyses suggest that stress from a new cancer diagnosis limits enrollment, while directed patient engagement in consent discussions facilitates it.
“Qualitative analyses suggest that the stress associated with a new cancer diagnosis limits enrollment, whereas directed patient engagement in consent discussions facilitates it.36”
From Promoting resilience in adolescents and young adults with cancer: Results from the PRISM randomized controlled trial (2018) · cites this paper as [36]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 68
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- [8]Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology Progress Review Group Closing the gap: research and cancer care imperatives for adolescents and young adults with cancer (NIH Publication No. 06-6067). Bethesda, MD: Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, and the LIVESTRONG Young Adult Alliance; August2006 [Google Scholar]
- [30]Glaser B. Theoretical sensitivity: advances in grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: The Sociology Press; 1978 [Google Scholar]
- [31]International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Clinical trials in children. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2010. Accessed November4, 2013 from: www.who.int/ictrp/child/en/ [Google Scholar]
- [39]Whelan T, O'Brien MA, Villasis-Keever M, et al. Impact of cancer-related decision aids: summary. AHRQ Evidence Report Summaries Number 46 (AHRQ Publication No. 02-E033). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; July2002. Accessed August10, 2013 from: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11928/ [Google Scholar]
- Authors
- Barakat, L. P., Schwartz, L. A., Reilly, A., Deatrick, J. A., & Balis, F.
- Affiliations
- Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (US)
- Corresponding author
- Barakat, Lamia P.
- Venue
- Journal of Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-03
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-11
- ISSN
- 2156-5333 (ISSN-L)
- 2156-535X
- PMC
- PMC3955960
- OpenAlex
- W2312310280
- Cited by
- 68
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 3.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Children's Rights and Participation
- Keywords
- adolescent and young adult cancer, patient involvement in treatment decisions, caregiver decision-making, healthcare provider perspectives, health-related quality of life, emotional maturity, family decision-making
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review