More Digital, More Diverse? How Digital Health Technologies Contribute to Representativeness of Clinical Trials
Naeher, A.-F.; Schmidt, L.; Kopka, M.; Schulte-Althoff, M.; Ahmed, A.
Show abstract
The rapid adoption of digital health technologies (DHT) in clinical trials promises to enhance trial representativeness by eliminating geographical barriers and reducing participant burden. However, their actual impact on participant representation remains poorly understood. Our analysis of 68,206 US-based trials from ClinicalTrials.gov uncovers gaps in participant representation in trials utilizing DHT for data collection (DHTcd). While DHTcd trials achieved overrepresentation of female participants (+1.7% versus US Census data and +5.5% vs. non-DHT trials) and reduced underrepresentation of Black participants by 4.2% (vs. non-DHT trials), they showed underrepresentation of adults aged 65 years and older (-8.8% vs. non-DHT trials). These effects vary by therapeutic area. We furthermore find that DHTcd trials report group-specific sample compositions less frequently than non-DHT trials, suggesting that growing DHTcd adoption has not been systematically used to improve trial representativeness. We conclude that evidence-based and indication-specific implementation strategies are needed to enhance standards for DHT-based data collection in clinical trials and to prevent a widening digital divide in trial participation.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Generalizability in real-world trials 96%
- Assessing The Net Financial Benefits Of Employing Digital Endpoints In Clinical Trials 95%
- Contextualising Single-Arm Ophthalmology Trials With Real-World Data: An Emulated Target Trial Comparing The Efficacy Of Interventions For Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- How Informative Were Early SARS-CoV-2 Treatment and Prevention Trials? A longitudinal cohort analysis of trials registered on clinicaltrials.gov 95%
- Exploring scalable assessment methods for terminated trials in ClinicalTrials.gov: A cohort analysis of German and Californian trials 94%
- STIMULATE-ICP: A pragmatic, multi-centre, cluster randomised trial of an integrated care pathway with a nested, Phase III, open label, adaptive platform randomised drug trial in individuals with Long COVID: a structured protocol 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Trials that turn from retrospectively registered to prospectively registered: A cohort study of ‘retroactively prospective’ clinical trial registration using history data 95%
- Number of Interventional Clinical Trials Registered per Million Population per Country Worldwide 93%
- Registration, Publication, and Outcome Reporting among Pivotal Clinical Trials that Supported FDA Approval of High-Risk Medical Devices Before and After FDAAA 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.