Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24495499›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2014

Procedures of recruiting, obtaining informed consent, and compensating research participants in Qatar: findings from a qualitative investigation.

Amal Killawi, Amal Khidir, Maha Elnashar, Huda Abdelrahim, Maya Hammoud, Heather Elliott, Michelle Thurston, Humna Asad, Abdul Latif Al-Khal, Michael D Fetters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Migrants Living in the United Kingdom and Their Perceptions of Participation in Health Research: A Mixed-Methods Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  4. Asylum-seeker women: Coping strategies and mental wellbeing.The International journal of social psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Perceptions and attitudes to clinical research participation in Qatar.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Community Perspectives Associated With the African PsA-TT (MenAfriVac) Vaccine Trials.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2015
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Amal Killawi
Amal Khidir
Maha Elnashar
Huda Abdelrahim
Maya Hammoud
Heather Elliott
Michelle Thurston
Humna Asad
Abdul Latif Al-Khal
Michael D FettersDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA. mfetters@umich.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVery few researchers have reported on procedures of recruiting, obtaining informed consent, and compensating participants in health research in the Arabian Gulf Region. Empirical research can inform the debate about whether to adjust these procedures for culturally diverse settings. Our objective was to delineate procedures related to recruiting, obtaining informed consent, and compensating health research participants in the extremely high-density multicultural setting of Qatar.

methodsDuring a multistage mixed methods project, field observations and qualitative interviews were conducted in a general medicine clinic of a major medical center in Qatar. Participants were chosen based on gender, age, literacy, and preferred language, i.e., Arabic, English, Hindi and Urdu. Qualitative analysis identified themes about recruitment, informed consent, compensation, and other research procedures.

resultsA total of 153 individuals were approached and 84 enrolled; the latter showed a diverse age range (18 to 75 years); varied language representation: Arabic (n = 24), English (n = 20), Hindi (n = 20), and Urdu (n = 20); and balanced gender distribution: women (n = 43) and men (n = 41). Primary reasons for 30 declinations included concern about interview length and recording. The study achieved a 74% participation rate. Qualitative analytics revealed key themes about hesitation to participate, decisions about participation with family members as well as discussions with them as "incidental research participants", the informed consent process, privacy and gender rules of the interview environment, reactions to member checking and compensation, and motivation for participating. Vulnerability emerged as a recurring issue throughout the process among a minority of participants.

conclusionsThis study from Qatar is the first to provide empirical data on recruitment, informed consent, compensation and other research procedures in a general adult population in the Middle East and Arabian Gulf. This investigation illustrates how potential research participants perceive research participation. Fundamentally, Western ethical research principles were applicable, but required flexibility and culturally informed adaptations.

Indexed as

IncomeResearch SubjectsAdolescentAdultAgedBiomedical ResearchComprehensionCultural CharacteristicsEthics, ResearchFemaleHumansInformed ConsentMaleMiddle AgedPatient SelectionQatar

Identifiers

PMID24495499
PMCPMC3937123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.