PubVisualPubVisual Book a Demo
Resources Blog About Contact Book a 30-Minute Demo →

Why Clinical Trial Results Need a Visual Story

A well-run trial still needs a story physicians can carry into the next patient visit.

The short version
  • Your trial hit its endpoint. And still, 63% of the time, physicians read only the abstract. Not because the result doesn't matter, because a full paper asks for more time than they have.
  • A hazard ratio tells a physician that something changed. It doesn't tell her why it should change what she does with the patient in front of her next Tuesday.
  • We build these as short visual trial stories, typically around two minutes, because that's a realistic window for a physician between patients.

A well-run trial still needs a story physicians can carry into the next patient visit. Here's what we found, and what it means for how you build your next story.

01The results are strong. The reach isn’t

Your trial hit its endpoint. And still, 63% of the time, physicians read only the abstract. Not because the result doesn’t matter to them, because a full publication asks for more time than most of them have between patients.

0%

of the time, physicians read only the abstract of a publication, not the full paper.

0

MLR review covers every version, however many journeys one approved core holds.

0+

languages one approved core is produced in, without restarting the scientific review each time.

Every figure here is independently sourced.

02Numbers alone don’t answer so what

A hazard ratio tells a physician that something changed. It doesn’t tell her why it should change what she does with the patient sitting in front of her next Tuesday. A visual story puts that reasoning back next to the number.

“A hazard ratio tells a physician that something changed. It doesn’t tell her why it should change what she does with the patient sitting in front of her next Tuesday.”

03Built for the reader who has minutes, not an hour

We build these as short visual trial stories, typically around two minutes, because that’s a realistic window for a physician between patients. The full publication stays available, unchanged, for anyone who wants the complete methodology.

04Still the same data, nothing added

Every frame of the visual story maps back to the approved publication. No new claims, no reinterpreted endpoints, just the same result told in an order a busy reader can follow start to finish.

The Impact Gap ReportFree · request access
Request the report →
Written by
The PubVisual Team
Editorial · PubVisual

We build the science communication our own field teams would want to use, then hand it to yours. This post came out of that same process.

More from the blog →
The Gap

Give her the two minutes she actually has

Your trial results are strong enough to earn more than an abstract skim.

Questions

Frequently asked questions

Because 63% of the time, physicians read only the abstract. Not because the result doesn't matter, but because a full paper asks for more time than they have between patients.

Typically around two minutes, because that's a realistic window for a physician between patients. The full publication stays available, unchanged, for anyone who wants the complete methodology.

No new claims, no reinterpreted endpoints. Every frame maps back to the approved publication, just told in an order a busy reader can follow start to finish.