Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27435596›Full record

ArticlePhilosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM2016

Maternal participant experience in a South African birth cohort study enrolling healthy pregnant women and their infants.

Whitney Barnett, Kirsty Brittain, Katherine Sorsdahl, Heather J Zar, Dan J Stein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Stop, think, reflect, realize-first-time mothers' views on taking part in longitudinal maternal health research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

5 authors.

Whitney BarnettDepartment of Paediatrics and Child Health, Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, and Medical Research Council Unit on Child & Adolescent Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. barnett.whitney@gmail.com.
Kirsty BrittainDepartment of Paediatrics and Child Health, Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, and Medical Research Council Unit on Child & Adolescent Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Katherine SorsdahlAlan J. Flisher Centre for Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Heather J ZarDepartment of Paediatrics and Child Health, Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, and Medical Research Council Unit on Child & Adolescent Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Dan J SteinDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

Improving the health of South African women with traumatic stress in HIV careR34MH102001 · NIMH · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI SIKKEMA, KATHLEEN J · 2014 to 2016
$581k
NIMH NIH HHS R34 MH102001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCritical to conducting high quality research is the ability to attract and retain participants, especially for longitudinal studies. Understanding participant experiences and motivators or barriers to participating in clinical research is crucial. There are limited data on healthy participant experiences in longitudinal research, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. This study aims to investigate quantitatively participant experiences in a South African birth cohort study.

methodsMaternal participant experience was evaluated by a self-administered survey in the Drakenstein Child Health Study, a longitudinal birth cohort study investigating the early life determinants of child health. Pregnant mothers, enrolled during the second trimester, were followed through childbirth and the early childhood years. Satisfaction scores were derived from the participant experience survey and quantitatively analyzed; associations between satisfaction scores and sociodemographic variables were then investigated using a linear regression model.

resultsData were included from 585 pregnant mothers (median age 26.6 years), who had participated in the study for a median time of 16 months. Overall participant satisfaction was high (median score 51/60) and associated with increased attendance of study visits. Reasons for participating were a belief that involvement would improve their health, their child's health or the health of family and friends. Potential reasons for leaving the study were inconvenience, not receiving clinical or study results, and unexpected changes in study visits or procedures. Variables associated with higher overall satisfaction scores were no prior participation in research, higher socioeconomic status, less intensive follow-up schedules and having experienced stressful life events in the past year.

conclusionsSatisfaction scores were high and associated with increased visit attendance. Participants' perceived benefits of study participation, most notably the potential for an improvement in the health of their child, were a significant motivator to enroll and remain in the study. The consistent theme of perceived health benefits as a motivator to join and remain in the study raises the question of whether participation in research results in actual improvements in health.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchPregnant PeopleVolunteersAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansInfantPregnancyResearchSouth AfricaSurveys and QuestionnairesHealthy volunteerParticipant experienceResearch burdenRespondent satisfaction

Identifiers

PMID27435596
PMCPMC4952056

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.