Referral processes for cancer clinical trials: a qualitative study of community and academic oncology clinicians

Cancer clinical trials are essential to advancing oncology care, yet participation remains low, particularly among populations served in community oncology settings. Referral from community practices to academic cancer centers is a key pathway to trial access, but referral processes are complex and poorly understood. This study examined clinician experiences with referral to academic cancer centers for trial consideration and identified barriers, facilitators, and opportunities to support referral processes. We conducted semi-structured interviews with cancer clinicians practicing in academic ( n = 13) and community ( n = 10) settings in Florida as part of formative research for a multi-level implementation study to improve equitable access to cancer clinical trials. Interviews explored referral experiences, communication practices, and clinician-suggested strategies to improve referral processes. We analyzed interview transcripts using thematic analysis. Clinicians described referral decision-making as shaped by clinical judgement, system-level constraints, and anticipated patient burden. Referrals were most often motivated by the need for second opinions, exhaustion of standard treatment options, access to specialized care, or consideration of clinical trials. Barriers included uncertainty about trial availability and eligibility, inefficient intake and communication processes, and patient-level constraints. Facilitators of effective referral included reliable relationships across sites, timely scheduling, navigation support, and shared expectations regarding care continuity. Referral to academic cancer centers for trial consideration is a nuanced process shaped by clinical, relational, and structural factors. Interventions to improve trial access should account for existing community research capacity and prioritize communication, coordination, and infrastructure that reduce clinical uncertainty and patient burden.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Cancer
Published
2026-10-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-026-17056-1
Primary Topic
Ethics in Clinical Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Referral processes for cancer clinical trials: a qualitative study of community and academic oncology clinicians

Paul L. Crispen, Naomi D. Parker, Thomas J. George, Margo Michaels et al.
BMC Cancer
Ethics in Clinical Research
article

Referral processes for cancer clinical trials: a qualitative study of community and academic oncology clinicians

Paul L. Crispen, Naomi D. Parker, Thomas J. George, Margo Michaels, Kelsey Lunsford, Shalini Mulaparthi, Stephanie A. S. Staras, Jonathan Thomas, Carma L. Bylund
article en

Abstract

Cancer clinical trials are essential to advancing oncology care, yet participation remains low, particularly among populations served in community oncology settings. Referral from community practices to academic cancer centers is a key pathway to trial access, but referral processes are complex and poorly understood. This study examined clinician experiences with referral to academic cancer centers for trial consideration and identified barriers, facilitators, and opportunities to support referral processes. We conducted semi-structured interviews with cancer clinicians practicing in academic ( n = 13) and community ( n = 10) settings in Florida as part of formative research for a multi-level implementation study to improve equitable access to cancer clinical trials. Interviews explored referral experiences, communication practices, and clinician-suggested strategies to improve referral processes. We analyzed interview transcripts using thematic analysis. Clinicians described referral decision-making as shaped by clinical judgement, system-level constraints, and anticipated patient burden. Referrals were most often motivated by the need for second opinions, exhaustion of standard treatment options, access to specialized care, or consideration of clinical trials. Barriers included uncertainty about trial availability and eligibility, inefficient intake and communication processes, and patient-level constraints. Facilitators of effective referral included reliable relationships across sites, timely scheduling, navigation support, and shared expectations regarding care continuity. Referral to academic cancer centers for trial consideration is a nuanced process shaped by clinical, relational, and structural factors. Interventions to improve trial access should account for existing community research capacity and prioritize communication, coordination, and infrastructure that reduce clinical uncertainty and patient burden.

BMC Cancer
University of Florida (US), Health Resources in Action (US), Watson Clinic (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
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.