Literature DB >> 20569152

Effects of participant preferences in unblinded randomized controlled trials.

Anna H L Floyd1, Anne Moyer.   

Abstract

Little research has deliberately investigated the effects of participant preferences for treatment condition in unblinded randomized controlled trials. We designed a study with a non-patient sample comparing a randomized arm to a preference arm of the same trial to investigate: (1) whether having a choice to select one's preference affects feelings about participation, belief in treatment effectiveness, treatment contamination, intervention adherence and engagement, and trial attrition; and (2) the interaction of preferences and treatment assignment on these variables. Contamination and attrition were rare and excluded from analyses. There was no effect of choice. Participants mismatched to preference felt less positive about their experience, but this did not affect belief in treatment, adherence, or engagement. Stronger effects may occur for patient populations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20569152     DOI: 10.1525/jer.2010.5.2.81

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics        ISSN: 1556-2646            Impact factor:   1.742


  6 in total

1.  Subversive subjects: rule-breaking and deception in clinical trials.

Authors:  Rebecca Dresser
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.718

2.  Counting on U training to enhance trusting relationships and mental health literacy among business advisors: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  L Saxon; S Bromfield; S H Leow-Taylor; C E Vega; M Berk; A D LaMontagne; A J Martin; M Mohebbi; K Nielsen; N J Reavley; A Walker; A Conway; A de Silva; K Memish; A Rossetto; G Tanewski; A Noblet
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 4.144

3.  Do participants' preferences for mode of delivery (text, video, or both) influence the effectiveness of a Web-based physical activity intervention?

Authors:  Corneel Vandelanotte; Mitch J Duncan; Ronald C Plotnikoff; W Kerry Mummery
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2012-02-29       Impact factor: 5.428

Review 4.  Participant outcomes and preferences in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: The electronic Person-Specific Outcome Measure (ePSOM) development program.

Authors:  Stina Saunders; Graciela Muniz-Terrera; Julie Watson; Charlotte L Clarke; Saturnino Luz; Alison R Evans; Craig W Ritchie
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement (N Y)       Date:  2018-12-12

5.  The Impact of Matching to Psychotherapy Preference on Engagement in a Randomized Controlled Trial for Patients With Advanced Cancer.

Authors:  Allison Marziliano; Allison Applebaum; Anne Moyer; Hayley Pessin; Barry Rosenfeld; William Breitbart
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-02-24

6.  Understanding patient values and the manifestations in clinical research with traditional chinese medicine-with practical suggestions for trial design and implementation.

Authors:  Wei Mu; Hongcai Shang
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2013-12-02       Impact factor: 2.629

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.