Literature DB >> 22212221

Assessing research participants' perceptions of their clinical research experiences.

Rhonda G Kost1, Laura M Lee, Jennifer Yessis, Barry S Coller, David K Henderson.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Participants' perceptions of their research experiences provide valuable measures of ethical treatment, yet no validated instruments exist to measure these experiences. We conducted focus groups of research participants and professionals as the initial step in developing a validated instrument.
METHODS: Research participants enrolled in 12 focus groups, consisting of: (1) individuals with disorders undergoing interventions; (2) in natural history studies; or (3) healthy volunteers. Research professionals participated in six separate groups of: (1) institutional review board members, ethicists, and Research Subject Advocates; (2) research nurses/coordinators; or (3) investigators. Focus groups used standard methodologies.
RESULTS: Eighty-five participants and 29 professionals enrolled at eight academic centers. Altruism and personal relevance of the research were commonly identified motivators; financial compensation was less commonly mentioned. Participants were satisfied with informed consent processes but disappointed if not provided test results, or study outcomes. Positive relationships with research teams were valued highly. Research professionals were concerned about risks, undue influence, and informed consent.
CONCLUSIONS: Participants join studies for varied, complex reasons, notably altruism and personal relevance. They value staff relationships, health gains, new knowledge, and compensation, and expect professionalism and good organization. On the basis of these insights, we propose specific actions to enhance participant recruitment, retention, and satisfaction.
© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22212221      PMCID: PMC3640854          DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2011.00349.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Transl Sci        ISSN: 1752-8054            Impact factor:   4.689


  30 in total

1.  Through the patient's eyes.

Authors:  S Edgman-Levitan
Journal:  J Healthc Des       Date:  1997

2.  Confirming comprehension of informed consent as a protection of human subjects.

Authors:  Jeremy Sugarman; Michael Paasche-Orlow
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Patients evaluate their hospital care: a national survey.

Authors:  P D Cleary; S Edgman-Levitan; M Roberts; T W Moloney; W McMullen; J D Walker; T L Delbanco
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 6.301

4.  Health care quality. Incorporating consumer perspectives.

Authors:  P D Cleary; S Edgman-Levitan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1997-11-19       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Volunteer human subjects' understandings of their participation in a biomedical research experiment.

Authors:  Norma Morris; Brian Bàlmer
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2005-08-08       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  The therapeutic misconception: informed consent in psychiatric research.

Authors:  P S Appelbaum; L H Roth; C Lidz
Journal:  Int J Law Psychiatry       Date:  1982

7.  Human fronto-mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation.

Authors:  Jorge Moll; Frank Krueger; Roland Zahn; Matteo Pardini; Ricardo de Oliveira-Souza; Jordan Grafman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-10-09       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Do nurses know what patients think is important in nursing care?

Authors:  M R Lynn; B J McMillen
Journal:  J Nurs Care Qual       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 1.597

9.  Using patient reports to improve medical care: a preliminary report from 10 hospitals.

Authors:  P D Cleary; S Edgman-Levitan; J D Walker; M Gerteis; T L Delbanco
Journal:  Qual Manag Health Care       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 0.926

10.  Important elements of outpatient care: a comparison of patients' and physicians' opinions.

Authors:  C Laine; F Davidoff; C E Lewis; E C Nelson; E Nelson; R C Kessler; T L Delbanco
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1996-10-15       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  34 in total

1.  Motivations and Decision Making Processes of Men With X-linked Retinoschisis Considering Participation in an Ocular Gene Therapy Trial.

Authors:  Amy Turriff; Delphine Blain; Morgan Similuk; Barbara Biesecker; Henry Wiley; Catherine Cukras; Paul A Sieving
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-03-16       Impact factor: 5.258

2.  Research participant-centered outcomes at NIH-supported clinical research centers.

Authors:  Rhonda G Kost; Laura N Lee; Jennifer L Yessis; Robert Wesley; Sandra Alfano; Steven R Alexander; Sylvia Baedorf Kassis; Philip Cola; Ann Dozier; Dan E Ford; Paul A Harris; Emmelyn Kim; Simon Craddock Lee; Gerri O'Riordan; Mary-Tara Roth; Kathryn Schuff; June Wasser; David K Henderson; Barry S Coller
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2014-05-19       Impact factor: 4.689

3.  Expectations and experiences of investigators and parents involved in a clinical trial for Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy.

Authors:  Holly L Peay; Aad Tibben; Tyler Fisher; Ethan Brenna; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 2.486

4.  Retaining Participants in Outpatient and Community-Based Health Studies: Researchers and Participants in Their Own Words.

Authors:  Donna H Odierna; Lisa A Bero
Journal:  Sage Open       Date:  2014

5.  Development of a research participants' perception survey to improve clinical research.

Authors:  Jennifer L Yessis; Rhonda G Kost; Laura M Lee; Barry S Coller; David K Henderson
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2012-10-15       Impact factor: 4.689

6.  An ounce of prevention: A pre-randomization protocol to improve retention in substance use disorder clinical trials.

Authors:  Thomas F Northrup; Tracy L Greer; Robrina Walker; Chad D Rethorst; Diane Warden; Angela L Stotts; Madhukar H Trivedi
Journal:  Addict Behav       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 3.913

7.  Research subject advocacy: program implementation and evaluation at clinical and translational science award centers.

Authors:  Rhonda G Kost; Carson Reider; Julie Stephens; Kathryn G Schuff
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 6.893

8.  Association Between Participant Contact Attempts and Reports of Being Bothered in a National, Longitudinal Cohort Study of ARDS Survivors.

Authors:  Michelle N Eakin; Thomas Eckmann; Victor D Dinglas; Ayodele A Akinremi; Megan Hosey; Ramona O Hopkins; Dale M Needham
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 9.410

9.  Soliciting views of various communities on health research: a prelude to engagement in specific research projects.

Authors:  Howard L Taras; Michael W Kalichman; Gery Schulteis; Jill Dumbauld; Yvonne Bell; Fe Fidelis Seligman; Kathy D West
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Evaluating various areas of process improvement in an effort to improve clinical research: discussions from the 2012 Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) Clinical Research Management workshop.

Authors:  Jane E Strasser; Philip A Cola; Daniel Rosenblum
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2013-04-19       Impact factor: 4.689

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.