ArticleClinical investigation2011
Incentives and barriers to neurological clinical research participation.
Article in Clinical investigation, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient and Caregiver Experiences of Participating in Parkinson's Disease Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Participant recruitment into a randomised controlled trial of exercise therapy for people with multiple sclerosis.Trials · 2015Trial
- Can you spare 100 days? The allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant caregiver requirement from the perspective of social workers.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Lifestyle management and brain MRI metrics in female Australian adults living with multiple sclerosis: a feasibility and acceptability study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2024Article
- Development of a knowledge translation platform for ataxia: Impact on readers and volunteer contributors.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding barriers and incentives to neurological research participation may improve clinical trial enrollment.
resultsTelephone-based focus groups were conducted with four neurological disorder patient groups (n = 22) and one caregiver group (n = 6). A total of 14 neurologists and neurosurgeons participated in structured interviews. Topics discussed included identifying ways in which health information is gathered and attitudes toward participation in medical research. Interestingly, 86% of physicians interviewed have referred patients to clinical trials and 82% of patients expressed interest in clinical trials participation. Patients cited their primary physician as the best source of health-related information, including information about clinical trials. Barriers to patients and physicians regarding clinical trials participation included compensation. Patients expressed concern about increased visit frequency and required treatment changes.
conclusionPatients are willing to participate in clinical trials and physicians are willing to refer patients for participation with appropriate compensation for their time and sensitivity to change in care.
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.