29 research outputs found
A thematic analysis of factors influencing recruitment to maternal and perinatal trials
Background: Recruitment of eligible participants remains one of the biggest challenges to successful completion of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Only one third of trials recruit on time, often requiring a lengthy extension to the recruitment period. We identified factors influencing recruitment success and potentially effective recruitment strategies. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1966 to December Week 2, 2006, the Cochrane Library Methodology Register in December 2006, and hand searched reference lists for studies of any design which focused on recruitment to maternal/perinatal trials, or if no studies of maternal or perinatal research could be identified, other areas of healthcare. Studies of nurses' and midwives' attitudes to research were included as none specifically about trials were located. We synthesised the data narratively, using a basic thematic analysis, with themes derived from the literature and after discussion between the authors. Results: Around half of the included papers (29/53) were specific to maternal and perinatal healthcare. Only one study was identified which focused on factors for maternal and perinatal clinicians and only seven studies considered recruitment strategies specific to perinatal research. Themes included: participant assessment of risk; recruitment process; participant understanding of research; patient characteristics; clinician attitudes to research and trials; protocol issues; and institutional or organisational issues. While no reliable evidence base for strategies to enhance recruitment was identified in any of the review studies, four maternal/perinatal primary studies suggest that specialised recruitment staff, mass mailings, physician referrals and strategies targeting minority women may increase recruitment. However these findings may only be applicable to the particular trials and settings studied. Conclusion: Although factors reported by both participants and clinicians which influence recruitment were quite consistent across the included studies, studies comparing different recruitment strategies were largely missing. Trials of different recruitment strategies could be embedded in large multicentre RCTs, with strategies tailored to the factors specific to the trial and institution.Rebecca L Tooher, Philippa F Middleton and Caroline A Crowthe
Ethical and practical challenges of sharing data from genome-wide association studies: The eMERGE Consortium experience
In 2007, the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) established the Electronic MEdical Records and GEnomics (eMERGE) Consortium (www.gwas.net) to develop, disseminate, and apply approaches to research that combine DNA biorepositories with electronic medical record (EMR) systems for large-scale, high-throughput genetic research. One of the major ethical and administrative challenges for the eMERGE Consortium has been complying with existing data-sharing policies. This paper discusses the challenges of sharing genomic data linked to health information in the electronic medical record (EMR) and explores the issues as they relate to sharing both within a large consortium and in compliance with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) data-sharing policy. We use the eMERGE Consortium experience to explore data-sharing challenges from the perspective of multiple stakeholders (i.e., research participants, investigators, and research institutions), provide recommendations for researchers and institutions, and call for clearer guidance from the NIH regarding ethical implementation of its data-sharing policy
Factors influencing the participation of gastroenterologists and hepatologists in clinical research
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although clinical research is integral to the advancement of medical knowledge, physicians face a variety of obstacles to their participation as investigators in clinical trials. We examined factors that influence the participation of gastroenterologists and hepatologists in clinical research.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We surveyed 1050 members of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases regarding their participation in clinical research. We compared the survey responses by specialty and level of clinical trial experience.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A majority of the respondents (71.6%) reported involvement in research activities. Factors most influential in clinical trial participation included funding and compensation (88.3%) and intellectual pursuit (87.8%). Barriers to participation were similar between gastroenterologists (n = 160) and hepatologists (n = 189) and between highly experienced (n = 62) and less experienced (n = 159) clinical researchers. These barriers included uncompensated research costs and lack of specialized support. Industry marketing was a greater influence among respondents with less trial experience, compared to those with extensive experience (15.7% vs 1.6%; <it>P </it>< .01). Hepatologists and respondents with extensive clinical trial experience tended to be more interested in phase 1 and 2 studies, whereas gastroenterologists and less experienced investigators were more interested in phase 4 studies.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study suggests that the greatest barrier to participation in clinical research is lack of adequate resources. Respondents also favored industry-sponsored research with less complex trial protocols and studies of relatively short duration.</p
Shared Decision Making and the Experience of Partnership in Primary Care
PURPOSE Communication has been researched either as a set of behaviors or as a facet of the patient-physician relationship, often leading to conflicting results. To determine the relationship between these perspectives, we examined shared decision making (SDM) and the subjective experience of partnership for patients and physicians in primary care. METHODS From a convenience sample of experienced primary care physicians in 3 clinics, we recruited a stratified sample of 18 English- or Spanish-speaking patients. Direct observation of visits was followed by videotape-triggered stimulated recall sessions with patients and physicians. We coded decision moments for objective evidence of SDM, using a structured instrument. We classified patients’ and physicians’ subjective experience of partnership as positive or negative by a consensus analysis of stimulated recall sessions. We combined results from these 2 analyses to generate 4 archetypes of engagements and used grounded theory to identify themes associated with each archetype. RESULTS The 18 visits yielded 125 decisions, 62 (50%) of which demonstrated SDM. Eighty-two decisions were discussed in stimulated recall and available for combined analysis, resulting in 4 archetypes of engagement in decision making: full engagement (SDM present, subjective experience positive)—22%; simulated engagement (SDM present, subjective experience negative)—38%; assumed engagement (SDM absent, subjective experience positive)—21%; and nonengagement (SDM absent, subjective experience negative)—19%. Thematic analysis revealed that both relationship factors (eg, trust, power) and communication behavior influenced subjective experience of partnership. CONCLUSIONS Combining direct observation and assessment of the subjective experience of partnership suggests that communication behavior does not ensure an experience of collaboration, and a positive subjective experience of partnership does not reflect full communication. Attempts to enhance patient-physician partnership must attend to both effective communication style and affective relationship dynamics
Recommended from our members
Navigating the Research-Clinical Interface in Genomic Medicine: Analysis from the CSER Consortium
Purpose The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium includes 9 NIH-funded U-award projects investigating translation of genomic sequencing into clinical care. Prior literature has distinguished norms and rules governing research vs. clinical care. This is the first study to explore how genomics investigators describe and navigate the research-clinical interface. Methods: A CSER working group developed a 22-item survey. All 9 U-award projects participated. Descriptive data were tabulated and qualitative analysis of text responses identified themes and characterizations of the research-clinical interface. Results: Survey responses described how studies approached the research-clinical interface, including in consent practices, recording results, and using a research vs. clinical laboratory. Responses revealed four characterizations of the interface: clear separation between research and clinical care; interdigitation of the two with steps to maintain separation; a dynamic interface; and merging of the two. All survey respondents utilized at least two different characterizations. Though research has traditionally been differentiated from clinical care, respondents pointed to factors blurring the distinction and strategies to differentiate the domains. Conclusions: These results illustrate the difficulty in applying the traditional bifurcation of research vs. clinical care to translational models of clinical research, including in genomics. Our results suggest new directions for ethics and oversight