Comparison of Participant and Site Perceptions of Decentralized Clinical Trials in the USA

Roland Barge PhD , Patrick Floody MBA
{"title":"Comparison of Participant and Site Perceptions of Decentralized Clinical Trials in the USA","authors":"Roland Barge PhD ,&nbsp;Patrick Floody MBA","doi":"10.1016/j.mcpdig.2025.100201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To define potential participant and site perceptions of decentralized clinical trials (DCTs).</div></div><div><h3>Participants and Methods</h3><div>Two qualitative surveys were conducted between January 2022 and August 2022 to assess current awareness of, and perceptions about, DCTs. The first survey received 141 responses from staff at our clinical trial sites; the second survey received 481 responses from US-based healthy individuals or those living with an illness.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>There was a difference in perceptions and willingness between participants and sites toward DCTs. Participants expressed more comfort with hybrid and fully remote trials than did the sites. Site staff were more concerned and less trusting than participants of DCTs; participants’ main concerns were regarding practicality and medical safety, whereas the focus for sites was on burden, trust, and security. Both sites and participants expressed confidence in fully remote clinical study activities when they have appropriate support; sites were less tolerant of fully remote clinical study activities if professional support was not provided. Overall, sites were more willing to manage the use of DCT-related technologies than were participants. It is highly likely that participants’ willingness to manage DCT technologies relates to the perceived burden of use (ie, willingness decreases as burden or impact on daily life increases). Sponsors, contract research organizations, and DCT vendors generally had positive views on DCTs. However, different stakeholders had different concerns.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>These results highlight the need for collaborative research and development of DCTs, as well as a clear DCT framework and regulatory guidance.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74127,"journal":{"name":"Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Digital health","volume":"3 2","pages":"Article 100201"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949761225000082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To define potential participant and site perceptions of decentralized clinical trials (DCTs).

Participants and Methods

Two qualitative surveys were conducted between January 2022 and August 2022 to assess current awareness of, and perceptions about, DCTs. The first survey received 141 responses from staff at our clinical trial sites; the second survey received 481 responses from US-based healthy individuals or those living with an illness.

Results

There was a difference in perceptions and willingness between participants and sites toward DCTs. Participants expressed more comfort with hybrid and fully remote trials than did the sites. Site staff were more concerned and less trusting than participants of DCTs; participants’ main concerns were regarding practicality and medical safety, whereas the focus for sites was on burden, trust, and security. Both sites and participants expressed confidence in fully remote clinical study activities when they have appropriate support; sites were less tolerant of fully remote clinical study activities if professional support was not provided. Overall, sites were more willing to manage the use of DCT-related technologies than were participants. It is highly likely that participants’ willingness to manage DCT technologies relates to the perceived burden of use (ie, willingness decreases as burden or impact on daily life increases). Sponsors, contract research organizations, and DCT vendors generally had positive views on DCTs. However, different stakeholders had different concerns.

Conclusion

These results highlight the need for collaborative research and development of DCTs, as well as a clear DCT framework and regulatory guidance.
美国分散临床试验的参与者和地点感知的比较
目的确定分散临床试验(dct)的潜在参与者和地点观念。参与者和方法在2022年1月至2022年8月期间进行了两次定性调查,以评估当前对dct的认识和看法。第一次调查收到了141份来自我们临床试验点工作人员的回复;第二项调查收到了481份来自美国健康人士或疾病患者的回复。结果参试者和参试地点对dct的认知和意愿存在差异。参与者对混合和完全远程试验比现场试验更满意。现场工作人员比dct参与者更关心、更不信任;与会者主要关注的是实用性和医疗安全,而场地的重点是负担、信任和安全。当得到适当的支持时,试验点和参与者都表示对完全远程临床研究活动有信心;如果不提供专业支持,试验点对完全远程临床研究活动的容忍度较低。总体而言,网站比参与者更愿意管理dct相关技术的使用。参与者管理DCT技术的意愿极有可能与感知到的使用负担有关(即,意愿随着负担或对日常生活影响的增加而降低)。赞助商、合同研究组织和DCT供应商通常对DCT持积极态度。然而,不同的利益相关者有不同的关注点。结论DCT的协同研发、明确的DCT框架和监管指导十分必要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Digital health
Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Digital health Medicine and Dentistry (General), Health Informatics, Public Health and Health Policy
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
47 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信