SinhaG. United Kingdom becomes the cancer clinical trials recruitment capital of the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
5.
UngerJMVaidyaRHershmanDL, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the magnitude of structural, clinical, and physician and patient barriers to cancer clinical trial participation. J Natl Cancer Inst2019; 111: 245–255.
6.
Cancer Council Victoria. Cancer treatment clinical trial activity in Victoria 2016-2018. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Cancer Council Victoria, 2021.
7.
Canadian Partnership Against Cancer. The 2016 cancer system performance report. Toronto, ON, Canada: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, 2016.
8.
TownsleyCASelbyRSiuLL. Systematic review of barriers to the recruitment of older patients with cancer onto clinical trials. J Clin Oncol2005; 23: 3112–3124.
9.
SedrakMSFreedmanRACohenHJ, et al. Older adult participation in cancer clinical trials: a systematic review of barriers and interventions. CA Cancer J Clin2021; 71(1): 78–92.
10.
FriendBDBawejaASchillerG, et al. Clinical trial enrollment of adolescent and young adult patients with cancer: a systematic review of the literature and proposed solutions. Clin Oncol Adolesc Young Adults2017; 6: 51–59.
11.
ForcinaVVakeesanBPauloC, et al. Perceptions and attitudes toward clinical trials in adolescent and young adults with cancer: a systematic review. Adolesc Health Med Ther2018; 9: 87–94.
12.
SiembidaEJLoomans-KroppHATrivediN, et al. Systematic review of barriers and facilitators to clinical trial enrollment among adolescents and young adults with cancer: identifying opportunities for intervention. Cancer2020; 126: 949–957.
13.
FordJGHowertonMWLaiGY, et al. Barriers to recruiting underrepresented populations to cancer clinical trials: a systematic review. Cancer2008; 112: 228–242.
14.
KhandwalaPDesaiDDasDG, et al. Racial disparities in cancer clinical trials. Alexandria, VA: American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2020.
15.
UngerJMCookETaiE, et al. The role of clinical trial participation in cancer research: barriers, evidence, and strategies. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book2016; 35: 185–198.
16.
Crawford-WilliamsFGoodwinBMarchS, et al. Cancer care in regional Australia from the health professional’s perspective. Support Care Cancer2018; 26(10): 3507–3515.
17.
MaddisonARAsadaYUrquhartR. Inequity in access to cancer care: a review of the Canadian literature. Cancer Causes Control2011; 22(3): 359–366.
18.
World Health Organization. WHO report on cancer: setting priorities, investing wisely and providing care for all. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2020.
19.
YabroffKRHanXZhaoJ, et al. Rural cancer disparities in the United States: a multilevel framework to improve access to care and patient outcomes. JCO Oncol Pract2020; 16(7): 409–413.
20.
SmithKBHumphreysJSWilsonMG. Addressing the health disadvantage of rural populations: how does epidemiological evidence inform rural health policies and research?Aust J Rural Health2008; 16(2): 56–66.
21.
DouthitNKivSDwolatzkyT, et al. Exposing some important barriers to health care access in the rural USA. Public Health2015; 129(6): 611–620.
22.
SubediRGreenbergTLRoshanafsharS. Does geography matter in mortality? An analysis of potentially avoidable mortality by remoteness index in Canada. Health Rep2019; 30: 3–15.
23.
AfsharNEnglishDRMilneRL. Rural–urban residence and cancer survival in high-income countries: a systematic review. Cancer2019; 125: 2172–2184.
24.
SankaranarayananRSwaminathanRBrennerH, et al. Cancer survival in Africa, Asia, and Central America: a population-based study. Lancet Oncol2010; 11(2): 165–173.
25.
CarriereRAdamRFieldingS, et al. Rural dwellers are less likely to survive cancer – an international review and meta-analysis. Health Place2018; 53: 219–227.
26.
MurchiePAdamRWoodR, et al. Can we understand and improve poorer cancer survival in rural-dwellers. BJGP Open2019; 3(2).
27.
MunnZPetersMDSternC, et al. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol2018; 18: 143.
28.
TriccoACLillieEZarinW, et al. A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol2016; 16: 15.
29.
ArkseyHO’MalleyL. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology2005; 8: 19–32.
30.
PetersMDMarnieCTriccoAC, et al. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evid Synth2020; 18: 2119–2126.
31.
PetersMDGodfreyCMcInerneyP, et al. Scoping reviews. Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer’s Manual2017; 2015: 1–24.
32.
LevacDColquhounHO’BrienKK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Science2010; 5: 69.
33.
TriccoACLillieEZarinW, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med2018; 169: 467–473.
34.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al. Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. J Clin Epidemiol2021; 134: 103–112.
35.
AbrahamJKereszturyJAzarJ, et al. Building a statewide clinical trials network for cancer care in West Virginia. W V Med J2009; 105: 6–11.
36.
AumillerBBParrottRLengerichEJ, et al. Responses to a theoretically adapted clinical trial education session: faith-based sites versus rural work site dissemination. J Cancer Educ2013; 28(4): 698–708.
37.
Avis-WilliamsAKhouryALisoviczN, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of underserved women in the rural South toward breast cancer prevention and detection. Fam Community Health2009; 32(3): 238–246.
38.
BaquetCREllisonGLMishraSI. Analysis of Maryland cancer patient participation in national cancer institute-supported cancer treatment clinical trials. J Clin Oncol2008; 26: 3380–3386.
39.
BaquetCRMackKMMishraSI, et al. Maryland’s special populations network: a model for cancer disparities research, education and training. Cancer2006; 107: 2061–2070.
40.
BarrettNJRodriguezEMIachanR, et al. Factors associated with biomedical research participation within community-based samples across 3 National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers. Cancer2020; 126: 1077–1089.
41.
BlackKBMcCoySERobinML, et al. Clinical cancer trials in a rural community cancer center in Southwest Oklahoma from 2000-2009. J Okla State Med Assoc2013; 106(1): 14–18.
42.
ClarkJMHeifetzLJPalmerD, et al. Telehealth allows for clinical trial participation and multimodality therapy in a rural patient with stage 4 non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Treat Res Commun2016; 9: 139–142.
43.
CopurMSRamaekersRGonenM, et al. Impact of the National Cancer Institute community cancer centers program on clinical trial and related activities at a community cancer center in rural Nebraska. J Oncol Pract2016; 12(1): 67–68, e44–e51.
44.
CoyneCADemian-PopescuCBrownP. Rural cancer patients’ perspectives on clinical trials: a qualitative study. J Cancer Educ2004; 19(3): 165–169.
45.
CupertinoAPSaint-ElinMde Los RiosJB, et al. Empowering Promotores de Salud as partners in cancer education and research in rural southwest Kansas. Oncol Nurs Forum2015; 42(1): 15–22.
46.
DavisTCArnoldCLMillsG, et al. A qualitative study exploring barriers and facilitators of enrolling underrepresented populations in clinical trials and biobanking. Front Cell Dev Biol2019; 7: 74.
47.
ElliottTEElliottBARegalRR, et al. Lake Superior Rural Cancer Care Project, part III: provider practice. Cancer Pract2002; 10(2): 75–84.
48.
ElliottTEElliottBARegalRR, et al. Improving rural cancer patients’ outcomes: a group-randomized trial. J Rural Health2004; 20(1): 26–35.
49.
ElliottTEElliottBARenierCM, et al. Rural-urban differences in cancer care: results from the Lake Superior Rural Cancer Care Project. Minn Med2004; 87(9): 44–50.
50.
EllisSGeanaMGrieblingT, et al. Development, acceptability, appropriateness and appeal of a cancer clinical trials implementation intervention for rural- and minority-serving urology practices. Trials2019; 20: 578.
51.
EllisSDGeanaMMackayCB, et al. Science in the Heartland: exploring determinants of offering cancer clinical trials in rural-serving community urology practices. Urol Oncol2019; 37(8): 529.e9–529.e18.
52.
FentonLRigneyMHerbstRS. Clinical trial awareness, attitudes, and participation among patients with cancer and oncologists. Community Oncology2009; 6(5): 207–213, 228.
53.
GeanaMErbaJKrebillH, et al. Searching for cures: inner-city and rural patients’ awareness and perceptions of cancer clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials Commun2017; 5: 72–79.
54.
GuadagnoloBAPetereitDGHelbigP, et al. Involving American Indians and medically underserved rural populations in cancer clinical trials. Clin Trials2009; 6(6): 610–617.
55.
KriegerJL. Last resort or roll of the die? Exploring the role of metaphors in cancer clinical trials education among medically underserved populations. J Health Commun2014; 19: 1161–1177.
56.
KriegerJLKrok-SchoenJLDaileyPM, et al. Distributed cognition in cancer treatment decision making: an application of the DECIDE decision-making styles typology. Qual Health Res2017; 27(8): 1146–1159.
57.
KriegerJLPalmer-WackerlyADaileyPM, et al. Comprehension of randomization and uncertainty in cancer clinical trials decision making among rural, appalachian patients. J Cancer Educ2015; 30(4): 743–748.
58.
KriegerJLParrottRLNussbaumJF. Metaphor use and health literacy: a pilot study of strategies to explain randomization in cancer clinical trials. J Health Commun2011; 16(1): 3–16.
59.
LawsinCRBorrayoEAEdwardsR, et al. Community readiness to promote Latinas’ participation in breast cancer prevention clinical trials. Health Soc Care Community2007; 15(4): 369–378.
60.
LevitLAByattLLyssAP, et al. Closing the rural cancer care gap: three institutional approaches. JCO Oncol Pract2020; 16(7): 422–430.
61.
LyckholmLJHackneyMHSmithTJ. Ethics of rural health care. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol2001; 40: 131–138.
62.
MaurerLHDavisTHammondS, et al. Clinical trials in a rural population: professional education aspects. J Cancer Educ2001; 16(2): 89–92.
63.
McCarthySSoloI. Barriers and enablers to accessing clinical trials in a non-metropolitan region. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol2017; 13(Suppl. 4): 195–196.
64.
MobleyEMCharltonMEWardMM, et al. Nonmetropolitan residence and other factors affecting clinical trial enrollment for adolescents and young adults with cancer in a US population-based study. Cancer2019; 125: 2283–2290.
65.
MobleyEMSwamiUMottS, et al. A retrospective analysis of clinical trial accrual of patients presented in a multidisciplinary tumor board at a tertiary health care center and associated barriers. Oncol Res Treat2020; 43(5): 196–203.
66.
PaskettEDCooperMRStarkN, et al. Clinical trial enrollment of rural patients with cancer. Cancer Pract2002; 10(1): 28–35.
67.
PathakSGeorgeNMontiD, et al. Evaluating adaptation of a cancer clinical trial decision aid for rural cancer patients: a mixed-methods approach. J Cancer Educ2019; 34(4): 803–809.
68.
PowellSFDibEGBleekerJS, et al. Delivering precision oncology in a community cancer program: results from a prospective observational study. JCO Precis Oncol2018; 2: 1–12.
69.
Randall-DavidBStarkNGierischJ, et al. ‘What do they know about it?’ How the North Carolina public views cancer clinical trials: implications for primary care doctors. N C Med J2001; 62(5): 281–285.
70.
RiggsMJHuangBChenQ, et al. Factors predicting participation in the Prospective Genomic Sequencing Study, Total Cancer Care (TCC), in Kentucky. J Rural Health2022; 38(1): 5–13.
71.
SabesanSBurgherBBuettnerP, et al. Attitudes, knowledge and barriers to participation in cancer clinical trials among rural and remote patients. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol2011; 7(1): 27–33.
72.
SabesanSZalcbergJ. Telehealth models could be extended to conducting clinical trials-a teletrial approach. Eur J Cancer Care2018; 27(2): e12587.
73.
SabesanSZalcbergJUnderhillC, et al. Implementation of the Australasian Teletrial Model: lessons from practice. Asia Pac J Clin Oncol2019; 15(Suppl. 8): 3–14.
74.
SaterenWTrimbleELAbramsJ, et al. How sociodemographics, presence of oncology specialists, and hospital cancer programs affect accrual to cancer treatment trials. J Clin Oncol2002; 20: 2109–2117.
75.
TannerAKimS-HFriedmanDB, et al. Promoting clinical research to medically underserved communities: current practices and perceptions about clinical trial recruiting strategies. Contemp Clin Trials2015; 41: 39–44.
76.
UngerJMMoseleyASymingtonB, et al. Geographic distribution and survival outcomes for rural patients with cancer treated in clinical trials. JAMA Netw Open2018; 1: e181235.
77.
VanderpoolRCKornfeldJMillsL, et al. Rural-urban differences in discussions of cancer treatment clinical trials. Patient Educ Couns2011; 85(2): e69–e74.
78.
ViraniSBurkeLRemickSC, et al. Barriers to recruitment of rural patients in cancer clinical trials. J Oncol Pract2011; 7(3): 172–177.
79.
WilsonV. South East Scotland cancer research network: an opportunity to expand. Clinical Investigation2013; 3: 613–616.
80.
WongRSLVikramBGovernFS, et al. National Cancer Institute’s cancer disparities research partnership program: experience and lessons learned. Front Oncol2014; 4: 303.
81.
ZdenkowskiNLynamJSprouleV, et al. Results of a survey of cancer patients’ willingness to travel to participate in a clinical trial. Intern Med J2019; 49(10): 1321–1325.
82.
ZulligLLFortune-BrittAGRaoS, et al. Enrollment and racial disparities in cancer treatment clinical trials in North Carolina. N C Med J2016; 77(1): 52–58.
UpadhayaSYuJXOlivaC, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on oncology clinical trials. Nat Rev Drug Discov2020; 19: 376–377.
85.
LeeJJBurburyKUnderhillC, et al. Exploring Australian regional cancer patients’ experiences of clinical trial participation via telemedicine technology. J Telemed Telecare. Epub ahead of print 18August2020. DOI: 10.1177/1357633X20950180.
86.
CollinsIMBurburyKUnderhillCR. Teletrials: implementation of a new paradigm for clinical trials. Med J Aust2020; 213(6): 263–265.e1.
87.
CunninghamJGarveyG. Are there systematic barriers to participation in cancer treatment trials by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cancer patients in Australia. Aust N Z J Public Health2021; 45(1): 39–45.
88.
ChinoFZafarSY. Financial toxicity and equitable access to clinical trials. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book2019; 39: 11–18.
89.
MahmudAZalayOSpringerA, et al. Barriers to participation in clinical trials: a physician survey. Curr Oncol2018; 25(2): 119–125.
90.
PetitteTNicholsANarsavageG. Cultural and environmental enablers and barriers to participation and retention in clinical trials for cancer research. EC Pulmonol Respir Med2019; 8(9): 600–606.
91.
UngerJMHershmanDLTillC, et al. ‘When offered to participate’: a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient agreement to participate in cancer clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst2021; 113: 244–257.
92.
WellsJCSharmaSDel PaggioJC, et al. An analysis of contemporary oncology randomized clinical trials from low/middle-income vs high-income countries. JAMA Oncol2021; 7: 379–385.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
