NCT00129636: Patient-specific letters after a consultant visit

This study compared the usefulness of a letter written specifically to a patient with a copy of the consultant's letter to the patient's general practitioner. Adults attending cardiology or respiratory clinics received both forms and were asked to identify unclear passages and assess their usefulness. The design was a single-group, open-label health-services study, not randomization to letter versus no letter. 1 2

The registry records 84 actual participants, although its earlier narrative proposed approximately 150. Measures included readability, misunderstood items, and the length and comprehensibility of the two letter styles. The record was updated in October 2019 and marked completed. 1 2

No verified numerical patient-preference or comprehension result was recovered here. The study's value lies in its direct comparison of communication formats; completion alone does not show that either format improved clinical outcomes. 1 2

Sources

1. ClinicalTrials.gov — ClinicalTrials.gov — NCT00129636. Original study registration: sponsor, design, population, endpoints and dated history.Original study registration · Original record checked against the registry API. Checked 2026-10-10. Registration and current registry fields do not by themselves establish efficacy. Historical details in the article retain their stated date. Supplied note: ClinicalTrials.gov — NCT00129636. Original study registration: sponsor, design, population, endpoints and dated history.