Background: The optimal management strategy for multiple sclerosis (MS), and many other chronic diseases, likely involves health behavior modification. Multimodal behavioral interventions may be most effective, but little is known about long-term adherence in people with MS. Methods: This qualitative study assessed barriers and enablers to long-term adherence by people with MS who self-selected for a 5-day health behavior intervention 3-5 years prior. Thirteen women and five men participated in semi-structured phone interviews, which were transcribed and thematically analyzed. Results: The experience was described as useful for information gathering, decision making, and practical strategies regarding health behaviors. The majority still followed supplementation and dietary recommendations most of the time, although consuming non-recommended food while eating out was common. Support at home, ability and enjoyment in food preparation, and ability to resist unhealthy foods were both barriers and enablers. Adherence to "time-consuming" exercise and meditation recommendations were less common and episodic. Many reported competing interests on time from work and family; and barriers including injuries and symptoms, weather, financial or geographical barriers, and lack of personcentred support and motivation. Increased fitness and mobility, weight loss, and a sense of accomplishment and control were advantages and motivators. Practical and attitudinal strategies employed included planning, tailoring activities to ability and preference, and self-monitoring. Conclusion: While most people attempted to engage with all components of the intervention initially, only some still engaged with all components, and none to the recommended levels. These data can inform future quantitative studies and health behavior interventions. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION A multimodal group lifestyle intervention may be useful to assist people with multiple sclerosis in information gathering, decision making, attitudinal changes, and practical strategies regarding health behaviors; as well as providing a sense of hope for the future and control over wellbeing. While participants are unlikely to engage with all components of a multimodal intervention to the recommended level, they are likely to make improvements to one or more health behaviors. Experiential learning, including going through recipes and ingredient lists, and practicing meditation and physical exercises, is helpful to instigate behavior change. The initiation and maintenance of behavior change was assisted by support from family, friends, and health practitioners; and practical strategies employed by participants, including planning, self-monitoring, and tailoring activities to ability and preference ARTICLE HISTORY

BackgroundIt is important for researchers to understand the motivations and decision-making processes of participants who take part in their research. This enables robust informed consent and promotes research that meets the needs and expectations of the community. It is particularly vital when working with Indigenous communities, where there is a history of exploitative research practices. In this paper, we examine the accounts of Australian Indigenous and non-Indigenous research participants in terms of how and why they agree to take part in research.MethodsA qualitative research approach was employed to undertake individual interviews with 36 research participants in Victoria, Australia. Eight participants identified as Indigenous and 28 were non-Indigenous. Thematic analysis was used to interpret the data.ResultsThere were stark differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous research participants in terms of why and how they decided to participate in research. For Indigenous participants, taking part in research was primarily to benefit their communities rather than for personal interests. Indigenous participants often started from a position of caution, and showed a considered and deliberate process of decision making. In weighing up their decision to participate, some Indigenous participants clearly articulated what was valued in conducting research with Indigenous communities, for example, honesty, reciprocity, and respect; these values were explicitly used to assist their decision whether or not to participate. This was in contrast to non-Indigenous participants who took researchers’ claims on face value, and for whom deciding to participate in research was relatively straightforward. The motivations to participate of non-Indigenous participants were due to personal interests, a desire to help others, or trust in the medical practitioner who recruited them for the research project.ConclusionUnderstanding research participants’ motivations about taking part in research is important. This is particularly relevant for Indigenous communities where there is a reported history of research abuse leading to mistrust. This understanding can lead to research practice that is more respectful and responsive to the needs of Indigenous communities and abides by the values of Indigenous communities. Moreover it can lead to more ethical and respectful research practice for all.

No abstract

Relationships of trust between research participants and researchers are often considered paramount to successful research; however, we know little about participants' perspectives. We examined whom research participants trusted when taking part in research. Using a qualitative approach, we interviewed 36 research participants, including eight Indigenous participants. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. This article focuses on findings related to non-Indigenous participants. In contrast to Indigenous participants, non-Indigenous participants placed their trust in research institutions because of their systems of research ethics, their reputation and prestige. Researchers working in non-Indigenous contexts need to be cognizant that the trust that participants place in them is closely connected with the trust that participants have in the institution.

Background Suicide research aims to contribute to a better understanding of suicidal behaviour and its prevention. However, there are many ethical challenges in this research field, for example, regarding consent and potential risks to participants. While studies to-date have focused on the perspective of the researchers, this study aimed to investigate the views and experiences of members of Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) in dealing with suicide-related study applications. Methods This qualitative study entailed a thematic analysis using an inductive approach. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample (N = 15) of HREC Chairs or their delegates from Australian research-intensive universities. The interview guide included questions regarding the ethical concerns and challenges in suicide-related research raised by HREC members, how they dealt with those challenges and what advice they could give to researchers. Results The analysis identified four main themes: (1) HREC members’ experiences of reviewing suicide-related study applications, (2) HREC members’ perceptions of suicide, suicide research, and study participants, (3) Complexity in HREC members’ decision-making processes, and (4) HREC members’ relationships with researchers. Conclusions Reliance on ethical guidelines and dialogue with researchers are crucial in the assessment of suicide-related study applications. Both researchers and HREC members may benefit from guidance and resources on how to conduct ethically sound suicide-related studies. Developing working relationships will be likely to help HRECs to facilitate high quality, ethical suicide-related research and researchers to conduct such research.