Systematic review paper

1119 Words5 Pages
Systematic Review

Systematic Review
The purpose of this meta-synthesis research was to synthesize a qualitative study performed to better understand the underlying reasons why only a fraction of cancer patients participate in cancer research trials. The attempt is to explore factors that influence participation in this type of study. Literature in the subject indicates poorly understood process of how patients are enrolled into clinical trials. This systematic review tries to improve the patient decision-making process in participating in cancer clinical trial and to provide Oncology nurses to treat patients with solid background utilizing evidence based practice (Biedrzycki, 2010).
The study was conducted in hope to
…show more content…
Three studies tested an educational intervention and two studies used an experimental design. 50% of the studies did not report timing of the research in relation to the decision regarding clinical trial participation (Biedrzycki, 2010).
During meta-analysis, response rates varied by type of measure and study design, only 50% reported response rates (range = 21% - 95%, median=71%. 29% declined participating because they had no interest and 24% declined with no reason given. One major reason people declined to participate was because they had no access or could not use a computer. Multiple time measures were conducted in decision regret, it was noted that responses were reduced (Biedrzycki, 2010).
The process used to pool the data together was clinical trial decision making. The main factors influencing this process consist of patient, provider, and treatment. Two studies specifically explored decision making by the patient. Education requirements impacted decision making since understanding the risks and benefits of clinical trials was the most important factor taken into consideration by the patient. Educational interventions were noted to have increased patient enrollment. (Biedrzycki, 2010).
If the patient found the education from the provider to be coercive, treatment was considered a burden. Time and travel also posed an inconvenience on the patient since it adversely affected quality of life and therefore deterred
Open Document