Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Clinical research is evolving. Patient involvement is no longer optional.

Stephanie Ernst
Conditions
April 30, 2025
Share
Tweet
Share

In January 2025, the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) formally adopted the updated E6(R3) Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines. Annex 1 and the revised 12 principles are already in effect. Annex 2 arrives in July. This is not just regulatory housekeeping. It is a clear message to the research world: Meaningful patient involvement is no longer aspirational. It is expected.

For decades, clinical research positioned patients as participants, not partners. They were expected to show up, sign forms, follow protocols, and stay quiet. Their insights were rarely sought, and their lived experience was often dismissed as anecdotal or irrelevant.

That model no longer holds.

The ICH E6(R3) guidelines now state: “Engaging patients in the design and conduct of clinical trials can help ensure that a trial is relevant and not unduly burdensome to participants.” (Section 3.1.3)

This is not a polite suggestion. It is a fundamental shift. Patient input is now a quality factor. Ignoring it puts the relevance, rigor, and compliance of a study at risk.

As the founder of a rare disease charity and someone actively involved in clinical research design, I have seen the cost of failing to involve patients. Studies often struggle with recruitment and retention, or miss outcomes that truly matter. This is not just inefficient. It is short-sighted.

Patient collaborators help research teams ask better questions, select outcomes that reflect lived priorities, and identify design flaws that would make participation difficult. In rare disease research, this becomes even more important. In areas like multiple birth complications, where data are limited and guidance is still evolving, patient organizations can provide insights that would otherwise be missed.

The updated GCP framework reflects years of global consultation. The 2020 Public Engagement Summary shows that stakeholders asked for more flexible, inclusive research practices and better integration of patient perspectives. The final guideline delivers on that request. But now, the responsibility shifts back to researchers and sponsors to put those expectations into practice.

There is also a regulatory reality to address. By July 2025, studies are expected to be fully compliant with E6(R3), including demonstrating how patient input informed the development process. That means the rationale for design choices must now include lived experience, not just operational convenience.

Engagement is no longer a communications strategy. It is part of study quality.

So how does patient involvement improve research?

When done well, it starts early. Patient organizations can:

  • Refine inclusion criteria to ensure broader relevance.
  • Flag unnecessary burden in visit schedules or assessments.
  • Simplify consent materials so they are truly understood.
  • Identify outcomes that matter beyond traditional clinical endpoints.

This leads to stronger trials, better data, and more ethical study conduct. It also builds trust between communities and researchers.

If you are unsure where to start, you are not alone. Many researchers are still learning how to meaningfully collaborate with patients and advocacy groups. Fortunately, many patient organizations are already embedded in research spaces through forums, support groups, and contributions to peer-reviewed literature. They are not hard to find if you look.

ADVERTISEMENT

In 2024, I co-authored a study published in Midwifery examining how people with experience of high-risk monochorionic twin pregnancies used social media during their care. Over 600 participants shared how these platforms influenced decision-making, provider communication, and treatment plans. More than half reported sharing information from online support groups with their health care team, and 70 percent said their providers considered it. These findings support what the ICH guidelines now reflect. Informed, engaged patients are shaping research and care in real time.

Clinical research is evolving. E6(R3) codifies what many of us have long advocated. Research is stronger, safer, and more relevant when it is done with patients, not just for them. As the July deadline approaches, research teams have a decision to make. This is the moment to review current protocols, assess where patient input is missing, and begin building relationships that will define the next generation of good clinical practice.

Because involving patients is not just the right thing to do. It is now the standard.

Stephanie Ernst is a patient advocate.

Prev

The anesthesia spectrum: Guiding patients through comfort options in oral surgery

April 30, 2025 Kevin 0
…
Next

The stigma surrounding diabetes harms those living with the condition. It's time to finally stamp it out.

April 30, 2025 Kevin 0
…

Tagged as: Patients

Post navigation

< Previous Post
The anesthesia spectrum: Guiding patients through comfort options in oral surgery
Next Post >
The stigma surrounding diabetes harms those living with the condition. It's time to finally stamp it out.

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Stephanie Ernst

  • Patients are not waiting: What MCDA twin parents teach us about shared decision-making

    Stephanie Ernst

Related Posts

  • We must help patients recognize how important their opinions are

    Karen Sepucha, PhD
  • We are warriors: doctors and patients

    Michele Luckenbaugh
  • When records are wrong, patients are at risk

    Denise Reich
  • Making time for patient advocacy is more important now than ever

    Bonnie Friedman and Sara L. Merwin, MPH
  • You are abandoning your patients if you are not active on social media

    Pat Rich
  • Patients don’t need quick diagnoses. They need accurate ones.

    Denise Reich

More in Conditions

  • Facing terminal cancer as a doctor and mother

    Kelly Curtin-Hallinan, DO
  • Why doctors must stop ignoring unintentional weight loss in patients with obesity

    Samantha Malley, FNP-C
  • Why hospitals are quietly capping top doctors’ pay

    Dennis Hursh, Esq
  • Why point-of-care ultrasound belongs in emergency department triage

    Resa E. Lewiss, MD and Courtney M. Smalley, MD
  • Why PSA levels alone shouldn’t define your prostate cancer risk

    Martina Ambardjieva, MD, PhD
  • Reframing chronic pain and dignity: What a pain clinic teaches us about MAiD and chronic suffering

    Olumuyiwa Bamgbade, MD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Forced voicemail and diagnosis codes are endangering patient access to medications

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Meds
    • How President Biden’s cognitive health shapes political and legal trust

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Conditions
    • The One Big Beautiful Bill and the fragile heart of rural health care

      Holland Haynie, MD | Policy
    • America’s ER crisis: Why the system is collapsing from within

      Kristen Cline, BSN, RN | Conditions
    • Why timing, not surgery, determines patient survival

      Michael Karch, MD | Conditions
    • How early meetings and after-hours events penalize physician-mothers

      Samira Jeimy, MD, PhD and Menaka Pai, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • Forced voicemail and diagnosis codes are endangering patient access to medications

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Meds
    • How President Biden’s cognitive health shapes political and legal trust

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Conditions
    • Why are medical students turning away from primary care? [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The One Big Beautiful Bill and the fragile heart of rural health care

      Holland Haynie, MD | Policy
    • Why “do no harm” might be harming modern medicine

      Sabooh S. Mubbashar, MD | Physician
    • The hidden health risks in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act

      Trevor Lyford, MPH | Policy
  • Recent Posts

    • Beyond burnout: Understanding the triangle of exhaustion [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Facing terminal cancer as a doctor and mother

      Kelly Curtin-Hallinan, DO | Conditions
    • Online eye exams spark legal battle over health care access

      Joshua Windham, JD and Daryl James | Policy
    • FDA delays could end vital treatment for rare disease patients

      G. van Londen, MD | Meds
    • Pharmacists are key to expanding Medicaid access to digital therapeutics

      Amanda Matter | Meds
    • Why ADHD in women requires a new approach [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

Leave a Comment

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Forced voicemail and diagnosis codes are endangering patient access to medications

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Meds
    • How President Biden’s cognitive health shapes political and legal trust

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Conditions
    • The One Big Beautiful Bill and the fragile heart of rural health care

      Holland Haynie, MD | Policy
    • America’s ER crisis: Why the system is collapsing from within

      Kristen Cline, BSN, RN | Conditions
    • Why timing, not surgery, determines patient survival

      Michael Karch, MD | Conditions
    • How early meetings and after-hours events penalize physician-mothers

      Samira Jeimy, MD, PhD and Menaka Pai, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • Forced voicemail and diagnosis codes are endangering patient access to medications

      Arthur Lazarus, MD, MBA | Meds
    • How President Biden’s cognitive health shapes political and legal trust

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Conditions
    • Why are medical students turning away from primary care? [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • The One Big Beautiful Bill and the fragile heart of rural health care

      Holland Haynie, MD | Policy
    • Why “do no harm” might be harming modern medicine

      Sabooh S. Mubbashar, MD | Physician
    • The hidden health risks in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act

      Trevor Lyford, MPH | Policy
  • Recent Posts

    • Beyond burnout: Understanding the triangle of exhaustion [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Facing terminal cancer as a doctor and mother

      Kelly Curtin-Hallinan, DO | Conditions
    • Online eye exams spark legal battle over health care access

      Joshua Windham, JD and Daryl James | Policy
    • FDA delays could end vital treatment for rare disease patients

      G. van Londen, MD | Meds
    • Pharmacists are key to expanding Medicaid access to digital therapeutics

      Amanda Matter | Meds
    • Why ADHD in women requires a new approach [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Leave a Comment

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...