ArticleBMC health services research2015
Consenting for contact? Linking electronic health records to a research register within psychosis services, a mixed method study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenges and solutions to participation in mental health clinical trials: Count Me In 2.0.BMJ mental health · 2026Article
- 'It Is Like a Cross-Stitch … All Joined Together But Not Making a Very Nice Pattern': A Qualitative Study of Patient Perspectives on Physical Health Inequalities in Severe Mental Illness.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Can a 'consent to contact' community help research teams overcome barriers to recruitment? The development and impact of the 'Research for the Future' community.BMC medical research methodology · 2019Article
- Article
- Attitudes toward Potential Participant Registries.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2017Article
- Facilitating mental health research for patients, clinicians and researchers: a mixed-method study.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Over promised, over-sold and underperforming? - e-health in mental health.Journal of mental health (Abingdon, England) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResearch registers of potential participants linked to Electronic Health Records (EHRs) provide a basis for screening and identifying people suitable for studies. Such a system relies upon people joining the register and giving permission for their record to be used in this way. This study describes the process of training clinicians to explain EHR-linked research registers to service users, and to recruit them onto the register.
methodTraining materials were developed for clinicians to help them describe the register to service users. These materials were based upon findings from focus groups reported elsewhere, they were then tested with 31 clinicians in early intervention psychosis services and each clinician discussed the register with service users on their caseload (n = 100 service users). Consultations were recorded and analysed in relation to their coverage of the training criteria. Service users also provided data on the acceptability of the process from their perspective. The content of clinicians' explanations to service users was described, and then compared against the likelihood of service users joining the register. Interpretive statistics (t-test and Chi-Squared) were used to explore differences between consultations in which service users agreed to join the register, and consultations where they did not agree to join.
resultsService users appeared more likely to join the register if they felt control over what they signed up to, this necessitated understanding that they could decide when, how often, and by whom they were contacted, that joining the register did not automatically enlist them to future studies, and that they could change their mind in future. Clinicians' explanations did not always include that researchers would be able to see the service users' EHR. Service users often confused the idea of signing up to the register and signing up to studies themselves. Confidentiality was not well explained, but service users were not always concerned by confidentiality.
conclusionEHR-linked research registers provide recruitment opportunities, and help service users to find out about research. Implementing these registers within mental health settings requires a trained clinical workforce and an informed service user population.
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.