Recruitment and Trial-Finding Apps—Time for Rules of the Road
Open Access
- 11 May 2019
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Vol. 111 (9) , 882-886
Abstract
The problem of insufficient recruitment to clinical oncology trials is well known. Some stakeholders view mobile apps as a solution with the potential to make recruitment more efficient, lower trial costs, support patient-centeredness, and accelerate treatment advances. Recruitment and trial-finding apps seek to disrupt the traditional approach to recruitment in several ways, including aggregating information about ongoing trials and presenting it in a user-friendly format, curating information to tailor search results to prospective participants’ interests, facilitating direct contact between prospective participants and trial sites, and, in at least one case, analyzing individuals’ tumor samples and medical records to provide tailored recommendations both for approved treatments and clinical trials. Although recruitment and trial-finding apps respond to a real need, they raise ethical concerns. Here, we outline six domains of ethical concern: review of recruitment materials, privacy and confidentiality, constrained choice and conflicts of interest, therapeutic misbranding, payment for accessing research-related information, and disruptions to care and research. We offer several suggestions and encourage additional dialogue to improve the ethical acceptability of these apps because, as third parties increasingly promise to revolutionize clinical trial recruitment by connecting patients and investigators via recruitment and trial-finding apps, we need some rules of the road.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Magnitude of Structural, Clinical, and Physician and Patient Barriers to Cancer Clinical Trial ParticipationJNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2019
- Protecting clinical trial participants and study integrity in the age of social mediaCancer, 2018
- Why There Are No “Potential” Conflicts of InterestJAMA, 2017
- Kiosk versus In-person Screening for Alcohol and Drug Use in the Emergency Department: Patient Preferences and DisclosureWestern Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2015
- Prevalence, Characteristics, and Publication of Discontinued Randomized TrialsJAMA, 2014
- Caught in the Web: Informed Consent for Online Health ResearchScience Translational Medicine, 2013
- Methods to improve recruitment to randomised controlled trials: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysisBMJ Open, 2013
- In person versus computer screening for intimate partner violence among pregnant patientsPatient Education and Counseling, 2012
- New directions in eHealth communication: Opportunities and challengesPatient Education and Counseling, 2010
- Central Challenges Facing the National Clinical Research EnterpriseJAMA, 2003