Literature DB >> 24955380

Utilizing Focus Groups with Potential Participants and Their Parents: An Approach to Inform Study Design in a Large Clinical Trial.

Sandeep Kadimpati1, Jennifer B McCormick2, Yichen Chiu1, Ashley B Parker3, Aliya Z Iftikhar4, Randall P Flick1, David O Warner1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the recent literature, there has been some evidence that exposure of children to anesthetic procedures during the first two years of life may impair cognitive function and learning in later life. We planned a clinical study to quantify this risk, a study involving testing 1,000 children for neurodevelopmental deficits. As a part of this planning, we conducted focus groups involving potential participants and their parents to elicit information regarding three issues: communications with the community and potential participants, recruitment and consent processes, and the return of neurodevelopmental testing results.
METHODS: Three focus groups were conducted with the parents of potential participants and one focus group was conducted with an 18-19 year old group; each group consisted of 6-10 participants. The moderated discussions had questions about recruitment, consenting issues, and expectations from the study about return of both overall trial findings and individual research test results.
RESULTS: The focus group data gave us an insight on potential participants' views on recruitment, consenting, communications about the study, and expectations about return of both overall trial findings and individual research test results. The concerns expressed were largely addressable. In addition, the concern we had about some parents enrolling their children in the study solely for the sake of getting their child's cognitive function results was dispelled.
CONCLUSIONS: We found that the individuals participating in our focus groups were generally enthusiastic about the large clinical study and could see the value in answering the study question. The data from the focus groups were used to inform changes to the recruitment and consent process. Focus group input was also instrumental in affirming the study design regarding return of results. Our experience suggests that the approach we used may serve as a model for other investigators to help inform the various elements of clinical study design, in particular the recruitment and consenting processes and expectations of potential participants regarding the return of individual research findings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anesthesia; Focus groups; Learning disability; Research trial participation; Return of test results

Year:  2014        PMID: 24955380      PMCID: PMC4061709          DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2013.879353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth        ISSN: 2329-4515


  33 in total

1.  Considerations and costs of disclosing study findings to research participants.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; Chris Skedgel; Charles Weijer
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-04-27       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Parents' vaccination comprehension and decisions.

Authors:  Julie S Downs; Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Baruch Fischhoff
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2008-02-08       Impact factor: 3.641

3.  Offering individual genetic research results: context matters.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Wylie Burke
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2010-06-30       Impact factor: 17.956

4.  False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception.

Authors:  P S Appelbaum; L H Roth; C W Lidz; P Benson; W Winslade
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 2.683

5.  Cognitive and behavioral outcomes after early exposure to anesthesia and surgery.

Authors:  Randall P Flick; Slavica K Katusic; Robert C Colligan; Robert T Wilder; Robert G Voigt; Michael D Olson; Juraj Sprung; Amy L Weaver; Darrell R Schroeder; David O Warner
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2011-10-03       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 6.  Developmental anesthetic neurotoxicity: from animals to humans?

Authors:  Deshui Yu; Bin Liu
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 2.078

7.  Disclosure of the right of research participants to receive research results: an analysis of consent forms in the Children's Oncology Group.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; Eric Kodish; Shaureen Taweel; Susan Shurin; Charles Weijer
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2003-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Duty to disclose what? Querying the putative obligation to return research results to participants.

Authors:  F A Miller; R Christensen; M Giacomini; J S Robert
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 2.903

9.  NMDA receptor function in the prefrontal cortex of a rat model for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Authors:  Molupe Lehohla; Lauriston Kellaway; Vivienne Ann Russell
Journal:  Metab Brain Dis       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.584

10.  Providing research results to participants: attitudes and needs of adolescents and parents of children with cancer.

Authors:  Conrad Vincent Fernandez; Jun Gao; Caron Strahlendorf; Albert Moghrabi; Rebecca Davis Pentz; Raymond Carlton Barfield; Justin Nathaniel Baker; Darcy Santor; Charles Weijer; Eric Kodish
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  2 in total

1.  Health research participants' preferences for receiving research results.

Authors:  Christopher R Long; M Kathryn Stewart; Thomas V Cunningham; T Scott Warmack; Pearl A McElfish
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 2.486

2.  Factors influencing the recruitment of lactating women in a clinical trial involving direct oral anticoagulants: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Yating Zhao; Amally Ding; Roopen Arya; Jignesh P Patel
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2018-10-10
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.