SynthesisPloS one2010
So different, yet so similar: meta-analysis and policy modeling of willingness to participate in clinical trials among Brazilians and Indians.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The willingness to participate in biomedical research involving human beings in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2019Pooled it
- Willingness to participate in clinical trials among patients of Chinese heritage: a meta-synthesis.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Altruism, Scepticism, and collective decision-making in foreign-born U.S. residents in a tuberculosis vaccine trial.BMC public health · 2018Trial
- Using systems perspectives in evidence synthesis: A methodological mapping review.Research synthesis methods · 2022Review
- Public Attitudes to Digital Health Research Repositories: Cross-sectional International Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- What empirical research has been undertaken on the ethics of clinical research in India? A systematic scoping review and narrative synthesis.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Regional variations in adverse event reporting rates and ACR responses in placebo/standard-of-care arms of rheumatoid arthritis trials.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2020Observational
- Patient distrust in pharmaceutical companies: an explanation for women under-representation in respiratory clinical trials?BMC medical ethics · 2020Article
- A prospective community engagement initiative to improve clinical research participation in patients with peripheral artery disease.SAGE open medicine · 2020Article
- Observational
- Interests shape how adolescents pay attention: the interaction of motivation and top-down attentional processes in biasing sensory activations to anticipated events.The European journal of neuroscience · 2015Article
- Strategy for recruitment and factors associated with motivation and satisfaction in a randomized trial with 210 healthy volunteers without financial compensation.BMC medical research methodology · 2015Article
- Clinical trials in India: Where do we stand globally?Perspectives in clinical research · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the global expansion of clinical trials and the expectations of the rise of the emerging economies known as BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India and China), the understanding of factors that affect the willingness to participate in clinical trials of patients from those countries assumes a central role in the future of health research.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) of willingness to participate in clinical trials among Brazilian patients and then we compared it with Indian patients (with results of another SRMA previously conducted by our group) through a system dynamics model.
resultsFive studies were included in the SRMA of Brazilian patients. Our main findings are 1) the major motivation for Brazilian patients to participate in clinical trials is altruism, 2) monetary reimbursement is the least important factor motivating Brazilian patients, 3) the major barrier for Brazilian patients to not participate in clinical trials is the fear of side effects, and 4) Brazilian patients are more likely willing to participate in clinical trials than Indians.
conclusionOur study provides important insights for investigators and sponsors for planning trials in Brazil (and India) in the future. Ignoring these results may lead to unnecessary fund/time spending. More studies are needed to validate our results and for better understanding of this poorly studied theme.
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.