ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin2006
Perspectives on medical research involving men in schizophrenia and HIV-related protocols.
Article in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Giving voice to study volunteers: comparing views of mentally ill, physically ill, and healthy protocol participants on ethical aspects of clinical research.Journal of psychiatric research · 2014Article
- Motivations of Patients with Diabetes to Participate in Research.AJOB empirical bioethics · 2014Article
- Recruiting for caregiver education research: perspectives of caregivers of people with multiple sclerosis.International journal of MS care · 2012Article
- Ethics in Psychiatric Research: A Review of 25 Years of NIH-funded Empirical Research Projects.AJOB primary research · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ethical issues in research on serious physical and mental illnesses have received great attention, and yet little is known about how the perspectives of clinical research participants with different diagnoses may compare. We conducted a preliminary study to examine the attitudes of men enrolled in schizophrenia-related protocols and in HIV-related protocols regarding the importance of medical research, key aspects of research participation, and the acceptability of research involvement by various groups. A total of 33 men enrolled in schizophrenia protocols and 15 men enrolled in HIV-related protocols volunteered for our study. Respondents affirmed the importance of medical research and endorsed many positive things about participation. Autonomy and altruism were identified as motivators for research involvement. Participation by diverse groups was seen as acceptable. Respondents expressed comfort and little stress with the interview process. Men in different diagnostic groups largely saw the issues the same. Our findings thus suggest that people with schizophrenia and HIV/AIDS who are enrolled in protocols may share a number of core attitudes or beliefs related to ethical aspects of research participation. Further study is needed to explore how research involvement may influence perspectives and whether differences in views exist across people with diverse physical and mental illnesses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.