Literature DB >> 30094047

Returning research results: caregivers' reactions following computerized cognitive training among childhood cancer survivors.

Sarah M Scott1, Jason M Ashford1, Kellie N Clark1, Karen Martin-Elbahesh1, Heather M Conklin1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few researchers routinely disseminate results to participants; however, there is increasing acknowledgment that benefits of returning results outweigh potential risks. Our objective was to determine whether use of specific guidelines developed by the Children's Oncology Group (COG) when preparing a lay summary would aid in understanding results. Specifically, to determine if caregivers of childhood cancer survivors found a lay summary comprehensive, easy to understand, and helpful following participation in a computerized cognitive training program.
METHODS: In a previous study, 68 childhood survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia or brain tumor with identified cognitive deficits were randomly assigned to participate in a computerized cognitive intervention or assigned to a wait list. Following conclusion of this study, participants' caregivers were contacted and provided with a summary of results based on COG guidelines and survey. Forty-three participants returned the surveys, examining caregivers' interpretation of the summary, reaction to the results, and information regarding preference for receiving results.
RESULTS: Caregivers reported results as important (93%), helpful (93%), easy to understand (98%), and relevant to their child (91%). They interpreted the results as generally positive, with many caregivers endorsing satisfaction (84%); however, concern of long-term implications was expressed (25%). Most preferred receiving results through postal letter (88%) or email (47%).
CONCLUSIONS: Benefits of returning research results to families appear to outweigh potential negative consequences. Returning results may help inform families when making future health care-related decisions. There is a great need to develop and assess the utility of guidelines for returning research results.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acute lymphoblastic leukemia; brain tumor; pediatric; research results

Year:  2017        PMID: 30094047      PMCID: PMC6075540          DOI: 10.1093/nop/npx029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurooncol Pract        ISSN: 2054-2577


  17 in total

1.  Coverage by the news media of the benefits and risks of medications.

Authors:  R Moynihan; L Bero; D Ross-Degnan; D Henry; K Lee; J Watkins; C Mah; S B Soumerai
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-06-01       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Informing research participants of research results: analysis of Canadian university based research ethics board policies.

Authors:  S D Macneil; C V Fernandez
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Offering results to research subjects: U.S. Institutional Review Board policy.

Authors:  Christa Kozanczyn; Katie Collins; Conrad V Fernandez
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2007 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.622

4.  The return of research results to participants: pilot questionnaire of adolescents and parents of children with cancer.

Authors:  C V Fernandez; D Santor; C Weijer; C Strahlendorf; A Moghrabi; R Pentz; J Gao; E Kodish
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.167

5.  Providing research results to study participants: support versus practice of researchers presenting at the American Society of Hematology annual meeting.

Authors:  Heather Rigby; Conrad V Fernandez
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2005-05-05       Impact factor: 22.113

6.  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

7.  Informing subjects of epidemiologic study results. Children's Cancer Group.

Authors:  G R Bunin; A E Kazak; O Mitelman
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 7.124

8.  The PedsQL 4.0 as a pediatric population health measure: feasibility, reliability, and validity.

Authors:  James W Varni; Tasha M Burwinkle; Michael Seid; Douglas Skarr
Journal:  Ambul Pediatr       Date:  2003 Nov-Dec

9.  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

10.  Feedback of trial results to participants: a survey of clinicians' and patients' attitudes and experiences.

Authors:  Karen Cox; Nima Moghaddam; Lydia Bird; Ruth Elkan
Journal:  Eur J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2010-07-31       Impact factor: 2.398

View more
  2 in total

1.  Health researchers' experiences, perceptions and barriers related to sharing study results with participants.

Authors:  Christopher R Long; Rachel S Purvis; Elizabeth Flood-Grady; Kim S Kimminau; Robert L Rhyne; Mark R Burge; M Kathryn Stewart; Amy J Jenkins; Laura P James; Pearl A McElfish
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2019-03-04

Review 2.  Providing trial results to participants in phase III pragmatic effectiveness RCTs: a scoping review.

Authors:  Hanne Bruhn; Elle-Jay Cowan; Marion K Campbell; Lynda Constable; Seonaidh Cotton; Vikki Entwistle; Rosemary Humphreys; Karen Innes; Sandra Jayacodi; Peter Knapp; Annabelle South; Katie Gillies
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 2.279

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.