Study design attributes influenced patients' willingness to participate in clinical research: a randomized vignette-based study

Agoritsas, Thomas; Deom, Marie; Perneger, Thomas

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.007

Cited by 49 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Qualitative interviews with the target population may suggest reasons why some people refused to participate in a specific study. Presenting vignettes of potential study designs and components has been used [2] . A walkthrough of the recruitment procedure by an investigator may also reveal barriers resulting in systematic bias.…”

Section: At What Point Do We As Readers/reviewers Researchers and Pomentioning

confidence: 99%

Declining Participation in Research Studies

Arfken

Balon²

2011

Psychother Psychosom

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: At What Point Do We As Readers/reviewers Researchers and Pomentioning

confidence: 99%

Declining Participation in Research Studies

Arfken

Balon²

2011

Psychother Psychosom

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While the study of Sood et al [6] on attitudes of patients showed that around 68% of patients were willing to participate in clinical trials, while 82% of them were unfamiliar with the clinical trials relating to their illness. A further study [7] specified that patients appreciated the contribution of clinical trials if these trials were safe and suitable and if they had received adequate information from their physicians. Therefore, having sufficient knowledge about the clinical trials would enhance Note: *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001 the willingness to participate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey on the Willingness of Clinical Research Professionals to Participate in Clinical Research

Felemban¹,

Elmorsy²,

Dick³

et al. 2017

J AIDS Clin Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To identify the impact of professional knowledge and education on willingness to participate in clinical trials. Methods:The study was conducted during January 2017 at Eastern Michigan University, Michigan, United States. It was a cross-sectional quantitative study in which clinical research professionals were invited to complete a shortened version of the Center for Information and Study on Clinical Research Participation (CISCRP) survey assessing their willingness to participate in clinical trials. A comparison was made between the sample of this study and the results of the CISCRP survey. Results:The 83 people who answered the survey represent 20% of the total number of people, which are 415, who were invited to participate. The study found that 80.6% of the survey respondents were willing to participate in clinical trials, significantly less than the results of the CISCRP survey on postgraduates, which found that 96.3% of respondents were willing to participate in clinical trials. In the present study, willingness was significantly higher among females and those with previous clinical trials experience. Willingness to participate correlated positively with perception of clinical trials safety (r=0.503, p<0.001). Conclusion:Overall, the clinical research professionals were moderately willing to participate in clinical trials but they were less willing to participate in clinical trials than the postgraduate participants of the CISCRP survey. Although some factors such as safety and type of medical intervention must be considered when attempting actual participation, knowledge and professional background affected the willingness to participate in clinical trials. These findings should not discourage efforts to recruit clinical research professionals into clinical trials.

show abstract

“…19 Inconvenienced patients may feel less altruistic. 18 We therefore hypothesized that patients who are forced to wait longer to register or to see a physician would be less willing to enroll in a research study, especially for studies that do not provide financial compensation or direct clinical benefit. Our findings indicate that other factors play a more important role in the decision to participate in research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16,17 It has also been shown in a hypothetical research setting that patients value convenience when deciding on research participation. 18 Additionally, many subjects participate in research out of a sense of altruism, 19 which might be reduced if a patient is dissatisfied with his or her overall ED visit. Therefore, prolonged ED wait times might adversely affect EM research participation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Are Patients With Longer Emergency Department Wait Times Less Likely to Consent to Research?

Glickman

Shofer

Mani

et al. 2012

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: There are unique challenges to enrolling patients in emergency department (ED) clinical research studies, including the time-sensitive nature of emergency conditions, the acute care environment, and the lack of an established relationship with patients. Prolonged ED wait times have been associated with a variety of adverse effects on patient care. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of ED wait times on patient participation in ED clinical research. The hypothesis was that increased ED wait times would be associated with reduced ED clinical research consent rates.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients eligible for two diagnostic clinical research studies from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2008, in an urban academic ED. Sex, age, race, study eligibility, and research consent decisions were recorded by trained study personnel. The wait times to registration and to be seen by a physician were obtained from administrative databases and compared between consenters and nonconsenters. An analysis of association between patient wait times for the outcome of consent to participate was performed using a multivariate logistic regression model.Results: A total of 903 patients were eligible for enrollment and were asked for consent. Overall, 589 eligible patients (65%) gave consent to research participation. The consent rates did not change when patients were stratified by the highest and lowest quartile wait times for both time from arrival to registration (68% vs. 65%, p = 0.35) and time to be seen by a physician (65% vs. 66%, p = 0.58). After adjusting for patient demographics (age, race, and sex) and study, there was still no relationship between wait times and consent (p > 0.4 for both wait times). Furthermore, median time from arrival to registration did not differ between those who consented to participate (15 minutes; interquartile range [IQR] = 9 to 36 minutes) versus those who did not (15.5 minutes; IQR = 10 to 39 minutes; p = 0.80; odds ratio [OR] = 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.99 to 1.01). Similarly, there was no difference in the median time to be seen by a physician between those who consented (25 minutes; IQR = 15 to 55 minutes) versus those who did not (25 minutes; IQR = 15 to 56 minutes; p = 0.70; OR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.01).Conclusions: Regardless of wait times, nearly two-thirds of eligible patients were willing to consent to diagnostic research studies in the ED. These findings suggest that effective enrollment in clinical research is possible in the ED, despite challenges with prolonged wait times.ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2012; 19:396-

show abstract

Study design attributes influenced patients' willingness to participate in clinical research: a randomized vignette-based study

Cited by 49 publications

References 45 publications

Declining Participation in Research Studies

Declining Participation in Research Studies

A Survey on the Willingness of Clinical Research Professionals to Participate in Clinical Research

Are Patients With Longer Emergency Department Wait Times Less Likely to Consent to Research?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About