Cancer Clinical Trial Patients’ Perceptions of Reporting Adverse Events Via an Electronic Platform

To our knowledge, this is the first study that investigates, in-depth, the participant experience of self-reporting cancer clinical trial AE data via an electronic platform. Our study lends evidence from the participant-perspective to previously-reported studies investigating the feasibility of collecting AE data directly from the patient. Participants agreed that the platform was feasible and would be of benefit to future cancer clinical trial participants.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science
Published
2025-05-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43441-025-00804-z
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cancer Clinical Trial Patients’ Perceptions of Reporting Adverse Events Via an Electronic Platform

Laurelie R. Wishart, Bena Brown, Minna Grahvendy
1 citations
Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

Cancer Clinical Trial Patients’ Perceptions of Reporting Adverse Events Via an Electronic Platform

Laurelie R. Wishart, Bena Brown, Minna Grahvendy
article en
1 citations

Abstract

To our knowledge, this is the first study that investigates, in-depth, the participant experience of self-reporting cancer clinical trial AE data via an electronic platform. Our study lends evidence from the participant-perspective to previously-reported studies investigating the feasibility of collecting AE data directly from the patient. Participants agreed that the platform was feasible and would be of benefit to future cancer clinical trial participants.

Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory ScienceVol. 59(5)
Griffith University (AU), The University of Queensland (AU), Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (AU), Princess Alexandra Hospital (AU), Metro South Health (AU)
University of Queensland
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
Ethics in Clinical Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.