Increasing Clinical Trial Awareness and Accrual Via the Web

  • Joyce C. Niland
  • Douglas C. Stahl
Part of the Health Informatics book series (HI)


The tremendous public and professional demand for online cancer information (Benjamin et al., 1996) is part of an emerging health care delivery paradigm in which information technology helps individuals access information about their medical conditions and potential treatment options (Widman & Tong, 1997). The Internet has had an impact on the evolving relationship between patients and physicians. There has been a growing movement advocating the view that patients are healthcare consumers with rights to information, interaction with health professionals, and participation in decision making (Sutherland et al., 1989). “Baby boomer” and post-baby boomer patient populations are found to be more autonomous, assertive, and demanding than patients of the past (Huber, 1993).


User Session Internet Protocol Address Clinical Trial Enrollment Oncology Clinical Trial Clinical Trial Information 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Afrin LB, et al. 1997. Electronic Clinical Trial Protocol Distribution via the World Wide Web: A Prototype for Reducing Costs and Errors, Improving Accrual, and Saving Trees. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 4:25–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Afrin LB, et al. 2000. How Useful Is the Web for Clinical Trial Accrual? Three Years of Experience with ACT: Proceedings of the American Medical Informatics Association, p 944.Google Scholar
  3. Benjamin I, et al. 1996. OncoLink: A Cancer Information Resource for Gynecologic Oncologists and the Public on the Internet. Gynecologic Oncology 60:8–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benson III, AB, et al. 1991. Oncologists’ Reluctance to Accrue Patients onto Clinical Trials: An Illinois Cancer Center Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology 9(11):2067–2075.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Farrar WB. 1991, Clinical Trials: Access and Reimbursement. Cancer 67:1779–1782.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Fisher WB, et al. 1991. Clinical Trials in Cancer Therapy: Efforts to Improve Patient Enrollment by Community Oncologists. Medical and Pediatric Oncology 19:165–168.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ho RCS. 1994. The Future Direction of Clinical Trials. Cancer 74:2739–2744.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huber SL. 1993. Impact of Clinical Trial Protocols on Patient Care Systems at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. Cancer 72:2824–2827.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hunninghake DB, Darby CA, Probstfield JL. 1987. Recruitment Experience in Clinical Trials: Literature Summary and Annotated Bibliography. Controlled Clinical Trials 8(Suppl):6s–30s.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jadad AR, Gagliardi A. 1998. Rating Health Information on the Internet. The Journal of the American Medical Association 279(8):611–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jenkins J, Hubbard S. 1991. History of Clinical Trials. Seminars in Oncology Nursing 7:228–234.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lawrence W. 1990. Improving Cancer Treatment by Expanding Clinical Trials. Cancer Journal for Clinicians 40(2):69–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mansour EG. 1994. Barriers to Clinical Trials: Part III: Knowledge and Attitudes of Healthcare Providers. Cancer 74:2672–2675.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Morrow GR, Hickok JT, Burish TG. 1994. Behavioral Aspects of Clinical Trials: An Integrated Framework from Behavior Theory. Cancer 74:2676–2682.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sutherland HJ, et al. 1989. Cancer Patients: Their Desire for Information and Participation in Treatment Decisions. The Royal Society of Medicine 82:260–263.Google Scholar
  16. Taylor KM, et al. 1994. Fundamental Dilemmas of the Randomized Clinical Trial Process: Results of a Survey of the 1,737 Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Investigators. Journal of Clinical Oncology 12(9): 1796–1805.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. WebTrends Corporation. 1998. User Manual. Portland, OR: WebTrends Corporation.Google Scholar
  18. Widman LE, Tong DA. 1997. Requests for Medical Advice from Patients and Families to Health Care Providers Who Publish on the World Wide Web. Archives of Internal Medicine 157(2): 151–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joyce C. Niland
  • Douglas C. Stahl

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations