ReviewPublic health nursing (Boston, Mass.)
A Conceptual Model to Promote the Retention of Women with Physical Disabilities in Research.
Review in Public health nursing (Boston, Mass.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- "You have to fight to legitimize your existence all the time": The social context of depression in men with physical disabilities.Archives of psychiatric nursing · 2021Article
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
Inadequate participant recruitment and retention practices can affect sample representativeness and thus the generalizability of research findings. Retention of research participants has been examined within the literature to some extent; however, there is no consensus on best practice in achieving acceptable results. Furthermore, there is a gap in understanding how to engage and retain women with physical disabilities (WPDs) in research. To address these oversights, we review (1) the significance of retention as a methodological concern, (2) factors that influence the involvement and retention of participants in research, including individual, population, and health-illness considerations, and (3) particular circumstances impacting the inclusion and retention of WPDs in research. On the basis of a review of the literature and our experience with the Healing Pathways randomized controlled trial (RCT), we present a conceptual model to guide culturally sensitive health research implementation with WPDs, and promote the engagement and retention of this group in RCTs and other forms of interventional health research.
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.