Patient Engagement Begins Before Consent

Start before a patient joins

A patient hears about a clinical trial. Before they decide to join, they may have questions. What is the study about? What will I need to do? What are the risks? Who can I speak with?

This is where patient engagement begins. It starts with helping a person understand the study and decide whether it is right for them. It continues through consent, enrollment, and their time in the trial.

Not every patient in a clinical trial takes a course or completes a module. At Master Table, our goal is to offer useful learning early, when people are first considering a study.

We plan to create short videos, modules, and lessons that match the trial's details. These materials would help people learn at their own pace, ask questions, and prepare for the next step.

What does the research say?

Videos can help explain a study. But a video alone may not lead more people to join or stay in a trial.

A Cochrane review of video and audio information found that these tools may slightly improve understanding. The evidence was uncertain, and the tools may make little or no difference to whether people choose to take part.

A 2026 review of trial recruitment also found that adding multimedia to a paper study information sheet made little or no difference to recruitment in the studies assessed.

This helps us set the right goal. We need to ask more than, "Did the patient watch the video?" We also need to ask, "Was it clear? Did it answer their questions? What help do they still need?"

Let patients help shape the learning

Patients can help us decide what to explain and how to explain it. They may point out a confusing word, a missing detail, or a task that seems harder than the study team expects.

A review of patient involvement in trials found that involving patients in trial processes was likely to improve enrollment. It was less clear whether this helped people stay in trials.

For Master Table, this means seeking patient input early. A lesson should reflect the questions people have, not only the facts a team wants to share.

Look beyond knowledge

Sometimes a person knows what to do but still faces a barrier. They may need help with a device, a different language, or a way to get to a study visit. Another lesson may not solve that problem.

One useful model is COM-B. It looks at three things that shape behavior: ability, opportunity, and motivation.

For our work, we can turn these into three simple questions:

• Can the person do it? Do they understand the task and know how to complete it?
• Do they have the chance and support to do it? Can they use the tool, reach the site, or get help?
• Does it make sense to them? Do they understand why the task matters, and can they share their concerns?

COM-B can guide how we design support. It does not prove that our modules will improve trial results. We still need to test what works.

Keep a human connection

Learning should give patients a way to ask questions and reach the study team.

A review of technology and trial retention explored a model called self-determination theory. It focuses on choice, feeling able to act, and feeling connected to others.

Our approach would use these ideas to help people feel informed, supported, and heard. We also aim to train coordinators, investigators, intervention partners, and technology and product teams to support that experience.

The goal is not to push someone to join. A person who understands the study and chooses not to take part has made a valid choice.

Make learning engaging and useful

We want learning to be clear and enjoyable. Short stories, animations, simple questions, and helpful feedback are options we can test.

A review of game-like features in online programs found promising effects on online engagement. However, much of that research came from learning settings outside clinical trials. We cannot assume the same results will apply to trial patients.

For MT, fun should serve a purpose. It should make a lesson easier to follow, not distract from risks or make a person feel pushed to continue.

Use analytics to learn what helps

UNIT, the Unified Network for Instructional Training, will host the learning. PING, the Panel Intelligence Navigation Grid, will display engagement analytics from UNIT.

As we build and assess the modules, we plan to look at where people start, pause, or stop. We also want to learn which lessons they find useful and where questions remain.

These signals can guide follow-up. They do not tell the whole story. A person may stop because they need help, already know the topic, or prefer to speak with someone.

Watching a video is not the same as understanding it. Completing a module is not proof that someone will attend more visits or stay in a trial. Those outcomes need their own measures and study plan.

Support each step

Our vision is to combine early learning, patient input, human support, and useful analytics. We aim to address barriers that can disrupt participation and help people make informed choices throughout the trial.

Trial-specific materials would be developed with the study team and reviewed through the required ethics process. FDA guidance explains that recruitment materials are part of the start of the consent process. A module can support a consent discussion; it does not replace it.

We hope this approach improves the patient experience and reduces avoidable trial disruptions. We will need to measure those results, not assume them.

To discuss patient learning or trial team training, contact hello@mastertable.com.

References

1. Synnot A, et al. (2014). Audio-visual presentation of information for informed consent for participation in clinical trials. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
2. Parker A, et al. (2026). Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
3. Crocker JC, et al. (2018). Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 363, k4738.
4. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. (2011). The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science, 6, 42.
5. Establishing Requirements for Technology to Support Clinical Trial Retention: Systematic Scoping Review and Analysis Using Self-determination Theory. (2023). Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25, e38159.
6. Looyestyn J, et al. (2017). Does gamification increase engagement with online programs? A systematic review. PLOS ONE, 12(3), e0173403.
7. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (1998). Recruiting Study Subjects: Guidance for Institutional Review Boards and Clinical Investigators.

Sources reviewed September 26, 2026. The studies cited evaluate other approaches and settings. They do not establish the effectiveness of UNIT or PING.