Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26772982›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2016

Postal recruitment and consent obtainment from index cases of narcolepsy.

Gambo Aliyu, Salah M Mahmud

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Gambo AliyuVaccine and Drug Evaluation Centre, Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. algambo@yahoo.com.
Salah M MahmudVaccine and Drug Evaluation Centre, Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. salah.mahmud@umanitoba.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccess to research volunteers may be hampered by low numbers of cases and few eligible participants for rare diseases in clinical settings.

methodsWe recruited volunteers and obtained informed consent by mail from narcolepsy cases in a case-control study, and here in we report feasibility, response rate, timeliness and cost. We invited index cases into the study by mail through their care-giving physicians then mailed study information and consent forms to cases that indicated interest in the study.

resultsOf the 33 index cases invited, 15 (45.0%) expressed interest in the study, and of those, 14 (93.3%) returned their signed informed consents by mail. The median number of days from invitation to consent return was 39, interquartile range = 45, and the cost per consent obtained from the recruited subjects was $ 23.61.

conclusionIn this setting, postal recruitment for biomedical research on rare conditions is feasible and time and cost effective.

Indexed as

Consent FormsInformed ConsentNarcolepsyPatient SelectionPostal ServiceResearch SubjectsBiomedical ResearchCase-Control StudiesCost-Benefit AnalysisFeasibility StudiesHumansRare DiseasesTelephone

Identifiers

PMID26772982
PMCPMC4715315

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.