GuidelineJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2012
Recommendations for the return of research results to study participants and guardians: a report from the Children's Oncology Group.
Guideline in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Respectful closure of a CEnR DNA integrity study: A bridge to sustained interactions with research participants.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Youth and family involvement in the development of a plain language trial results communication tool: CommuniKIDS.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Children's Oncology Group 2023 blueprint: Nursing discipline.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2023Article
- Safety and efficacy of oil palm phenolic supplementation in improving lipid profile among hyperlipidemic adults: a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- The effects of releasing early results from ongoing clinical trials.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Returning aggregate results of clinical trials: Empirical data of patient preferences.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2018Article
- How can we get Iraq- and Afghanistan-deployed US Veterans to participate in health-related research? Findings from a national focus group study.BMC medical research methodology · 2018Article
- Returning research results: caregivers' reactions following computerized cognitive training among childhood cancer survivors.Neuro-oncology practice · 2018Article
- Willingness to Participate in a National Precision Medicine Cohort: Attitudes of Chronic Kidney Disease Patients at a Cleveland Public Hospital.Journal of personalized medicine · 2018Article
- Patient, caregiver and physician perspectives on participating in a thoracic rapid tissue donation program.Patient education and counseling · 2018Article
- Health research participants are not receiving research results: a collaborative solution is needed.Trials · 2017Article
- Health research participants' preferences for receiving research results.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2016Article
- Returning individual research results for genome sequences of pancreatic cancer.Genome medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe Children's Oncology Group (COG) strongly supports the widely recognized principle that research participants should be offered a summary of study results. The mechanism by which to do so in a cooperative research group setting has not been previously described.
methodsOn the basis of a review of the available empirical and theoretic literature and on iterative, multidisciplinary discussion, a COG Return of Results Task Force (RRTF) offered detailed recommendations for the return of results to research study participants.
resultsThe RRTF established guidelines for the notification of research participants and/or their parents/guardians about the availability of research results, a mechanism for and timing of sharing results via registration on the COG public Web site, the scope of the research to be shared, the target audience, and a process for creating and vetting lay summaries of study results. The RRTF recognized the challenges in adequately conveying complex scientific results to audiences with varying levels of health literacy and recommended that particularly sensitive or complex results be returned using direct personal contact. The RRTF also recommended evaluation of the cost, effectiveness, and impact of sharing results.
conclusionThese recommendations provide a framework for the offering and returning of results to participants. They can be used by individual investigators, multi-investigator research collaboratives, and large cooperative groups.
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.