Literature DB >> 23665997

Systematic review and metasummary of attitudes toward research in emergency medical conditions.

Alexander T Limkakeng1, Lucas Lentini Herling de Oliveira2, Tais Moreira2, Amruta Phadtare2, Clarissa Garcia Rodrigues2, Michael B Hocker1, Ross McKinney3, Corrine I Voils4, Ricardo Pietrobon2.   

Abstract

Emergency departments are challenging research settings, where truly informed consent can be difficult to obtain. A deeper understanding of emergency medical patients' opinions about research is needed. We conducted a systematic review and meta-summary of quantitative and qualitative studies on which values, attitudes, or beliefs of emergent medical research participants influence research participation. We included studies of adults that investigated opinions toward emergency medicine research participation. We excluded studies focused on the association between demographics or consent document features and participation and those focused on non-emergency research. In August 2011, we searched the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Scirus, PsycINFO, AgeLine and Global Health. Titles, abstracts and then full manuscripts were independently evaluated by two reviewers. Disagreements were resolved by consensus and adjudicated by a third author. Studies were evaluated for bias using standardised scores. We report themes associated with participation or refusal. Our initial search produced over 1800 articles. A total of 44 articles were extracted for full-manuscript analysis, and 14 were retained based on our eligibility criteria. Among factors favouring participation, altruism and personal health benefit had the highest frequency. Mistrust of researchers, feeling like a 'guinea pig' and risk were leading factors favouring refusal. Many studies noted limitations of informed consent processes in emergent conditions. We conclude that highlighting the benefits to the participant and society, mitigating risk and increasing public trust may increase research participation in emergency medical research. New methods for conducting informed consent in such studies are needed. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Informed Consent; Patient perspective; Research Ethics; Research on Special Populations

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23665997     DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2012-101147

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  11 in total

1.  Racial Differences Among Factors Associated with Participation in Clinical Research Trials.

Authors:  Anita Kurt; Lauren Semler; Jeanne L Jacoby; Melanie B Johnson; Beth A Careyva; Brian Stello; Timothy Friel; Mark C Knouse; Hope Kincaid; John C Smulian
Journal:  J Racial Ethn Health Disparities       Date:  2016-09-08

2.  A paradigm for understanding trust and mistrust in medical research: The Community VOICES study.

Authors:  M Smirnoff; I Wilets; D F Ragin; R Adams; J Holohan; R Rhodes; G Winkel; E M Ricci; C Clesca; L D Richardson
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2018-02-16

3.  Improving Clinical Research to Inform Advocacy Initiatives with Underserved Individuals.

Authors:  Claire Burgess; Abigail Batchelder
Journal:  Behav Ther (N Y N Y)       Date:  2020-10

4.  Understanding motivations to participate in an observational research study: Why do patients enroll?

Authors:  Michael C Soule; Eleanor E Beale; Laura Suarez; Scott R Beach; Carol A Mastromauro; Christopher M Celano; Shannon V Moore; Jeff C Huffman
Journal:  Soc Work Health Care       Date:  2016-03-02

5.  Accessing health services through the back door: a qualitative interview study investigating reasons why people participate in health research in Canada.

Authors:  Anne Townsend; Susan M Cox
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-10-12       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 6.  Key stakeholder perceptions about consent to participate in acute illness research: a rapid, systematic review to inform epi/pandemic research preparedness.

Authors:  Nina H Gobat; Micaela Gal; Nick A Francis; Kerenza Hood; Angela Watkins; Jill Turner; Ronald Moore; Steve A R Webb; Christopher C Butler; Alistair Nichol
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 2.279

7.  Factors Influencing Participation in Clinical Trials: Emergency Medicine vs. Other Specialties.

Authors:  Anita Kurt; Hope M Kincaid; Charity Curtis; Lauren Semler; Matthew Meyers; Melanie Johnson; Beth A Careyva; Brian Stello; Timothy J Friel; Mark C Knouse; John C Smulian; Jeanne L Jacoby
Journal:  West J Emerg Med       Date:  2017-07-17

Review 8.  Why do patients take part in research? An overview of systematic reviews of psychosocial barriers and facilitators.

Authors:  Rebecca Sheridan; Jacqueline Martin-Kerry; Joanna Hudson; Adwoa Parker; Peter Bower; Peter Knapp
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 2.279

9.  The Association between Emergency Department Super-Utilizer Status and Willingness to Participate in Research.

Authors:  Henry W Young; Emmett T Martin; Evan Kwiatkowski; J Adrian Tyndall; Linda B Cottler
Journal:  Emerg Med Int       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 1.112

10.  The acceptability of delayed consent for prehospital emergency care research in the Western Cape province of South Africa.

Authors:  Willem Stassen; Sanjeev Rambharose; Lee Wallis; Keymanthri Moodley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.