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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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