Lay titles for clinical trials: Is industry achieving the balance?

Q2 Health Professions Medical Writing Pub Date : 2023-03-15 DOI:10.56012/lnhw1492
Leonie H. E. Leithold, C. Brown, Julia Hind, T. Schindler
{"title":"Lay titles for clinical trials: Is industry achieving the balance?","authors":"Leonie H. E. Leithold, C. Brown, Julia Hind, T. Schindler","doi":"10.56012/lnhw1492","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Titles of clinical trials may directly influence whether patients, caretakers, or healthcare professionals will want to obtain more information about the trial. Major clinical trial registries require lay titles (referred to as “brief” or “public” titles) that are understandable to the public. However, devising adequate lay titles is challenging. In this study, we assessed the quality of lay titles from Phase II/III and III clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov in 2021. Assessments included the presence of recommended elements, use of technical terms, an expert assessment of adequacy and informativeness, title length, and the use of acronyms. A large proportion (72%) of lay titles did not include all recommended elements, contained technical terms (73%), and were not adequate according to experts (51%). Often, brevity was given precedence over content and understandability. Generally, lay titles with acronyms had better ratings in all assessed categories. These results suggest that industry sponsors can do more to create lay titles that better inform patients and healthcare providers.","PeriodicalId":37384,"journal":{"name":"Medical Writing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Writing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56012/lnhw1492","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Titles of clinical trials may directly influence whether patients, caretakers, or healthcare professionals will want to obtain more information about the trial. Major clinical trial registries require lay titles (referred to as “brief” or “public” titles) that are understandable to the public. However, devising adequate lay titles is challenging. In this study, we assessed the quality of lay titles from Phase II/III and III clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov in 2021. Assessments included the presence of recommended elements, use of technical terms, an expert assessment of adequacy and informativeness, title length, and the use of acronyms. A large proportion (72%) of lay titles did not include all recommended elements, contained technical terms (73%), and were not adequate according to experts (51%). Often, brevity was given precedence over content and understandability. Generally, lay titles with acronyms had better ratings in all assessed categories. These results suggest that industry sponsors can do more to create lay titles that better inform patients and healthcare providers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
临床试验的标题:行业是否达到了平衡?
临床试验的标题可能会直接影响患者、护理人员或医疗保健专业人员是否希望获得有关试验的更多信息。主要临床试验注册机构需要公众可以理解的非专业名称(称为“简要”或“公开”名称)。然而,设计足够的俗名是一项挑战。在这项研究中,我们评估了2021年在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册的II/III期和III期临床试验的非临床标题的质量。评估包括建议要素的存在、技术术语的使用、对充分性和信息性的专家评估、标题长度和缩写词的使用。专家表示,很大一部分(72%)的非专业标题没有包括所有推荐元素,包含技术术语(73%),而且不够充分(51%)。通常,简洁性优先于内容和可理解性。一般来说,在所有评估类别中,带有首字母缩写词的外行标题都有更好的评级。这些结果表明,行业赞助商可以做更多的工作来创建非专业标题,更好地为患者和医疗保健提供者提供信息。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Writing
Medical Writing Health Professions-Medical Terminology
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Medical Writing is a quarterly publication that aims to educate and inform medical writers in Europe and beyond. Each issue focuses on a specific theme, and all issues include feature articles and regular columns on topics relevant to the practice of medical writing. We welcome articles providing practical advice to medical writers; guidelines and reviews/summaries/updates of guidelines published elsewhere; original research; opinion pieces; interviews; and review articles.
期刊最新文献
I did it so you don’t have to: Lessons learned as a young writer struggling with a regulatory document Overcoming confidential information challenges faced by study sponsors today Meet and Share session on protecting the public from undue harm during research studies: A report Medical Writing explores the many faces of biotechnology Harold Swanberg, MD: Why and how EMWA should remember him
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1