Redefining reach: inclusivity gaps in UK phase 3 head and neck trial protocols over the last decade

Clicks: 1
ID: 325617
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #326 of 329 articles by views in JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 329 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
AIM: Inclusivity within head and neck cancer trials remains poorly characterised potentially limiting the applicability and validity of findings to under-represented groups. Using inclusive frameworks that enhance trial design and delivery for under-served groups we conducted a systematic review of Phase 3 UK-sponsored Head and Heck trial protocols over the last decade. METHODS: Head and Neck Phase 3 trial protocols registered between July 2014 to July 2024 were retrieved from the ISRCTN and ClinicalTrials.gov registries. Trial protocols were assessed using PRO-EDI (Patient-Reported Outcomes for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion) and the NHIR INCLUDE framework, and findings summarized narratively. Participant characteristics collated included age, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, education and disability. RESULTS: A total of 2,157 trial protocols were identified (2,029 ISRCTN and 128 Clinicaltrials.gov) and screened. Fourteen trial protocols met inclusion criteria for final analysis. Reporting of inclusion-related characteristics was inconsistent. Most trials (85.7%) imposed no upper age limit. Only 14.3% of trial protocols referenced ethnicity or socioeconomic status, and 28.6% mandated English proficiency without translation support. Only 28.6% trial protocols explicitly mention biological sex. None documented health literacy considerations or planned subgroup analyses. CONCLUSION: Overall, trial protocols demonstrated lack of inclusive considerations, underscoring the continued gap between policy and practice. The recently published NIHR's mandatory inclusion requirements, evolving standards in journal-led inclusive reporting in research trials and emerging initiatives akin to START-EDI, present opportunities to strengthen transparency, accountability and enhance representation in future head and neck cancer trials.
Reference Key
openalex_W7203753365 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Yuri Hirayama, Shoba Dawson, Somiah Siddiq
Journal JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/jnci/djag283
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.