Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28106553›Full record

ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2017

Attitudes toward Potential Participant Registries.

Joshua D Grill, Andrew Holbrook, Aimee Pierce, Dan Hoang, Daniel L Gillen

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joshua D GrillInstitute for Memory Impairments and Neurological Disorders and Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Andrew HolbrookInstitute for Memory Impairments and Neurological Disorders and Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Aimee PierceInstitute for Memory Impairments and Neurological Disorders and Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Dan HoangInstitute for Memory Impairments and Neurological Disorders and Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Daniel L GillenInstitute for Memory Impairments and Neurological Disorders and Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
University of California, Irvine · US

Funding

UC Irvine Alzheimer's Disease Research Center Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell CoreP50AG016573 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI LAFERLA, FRANK M · 2000 to 2019
$37.0M
University of California Health Participation in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C)UL1TR001414 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI COOPER, DAN M, VILAIN, ERIC J. · 2015 to 2023
$35.1M
Institute for Clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR000153 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI COOPER, DAN M · 2012 to 2015
$12.1M
Institute for Clinical and Translational ScienceKL2TR000147 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI COOPER, DAN M · 2012 to 2015
$940k
NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR000147NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000153NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001414NIA NIH HHS P50 AG016573
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Difficult participant recruitment is a consistent barrier to successful medical research. Potential participant registries represent an increasingly common intervention to overcome this barrier. A variety of models for registries exist, but few data are available to instruct their design and implementation. To provide such data, we surveyed 110 cognitively normal research participants enrolled in a longitudinal study of aging and dementia. Seventy-four (67%) individuals participated in the study. Most (78%, CI: 0.67, 0.87) participants were likely to enroll in a registry. Willingness to participate was reduced for registries that required enrollment through the Internet using a password (26%, CI: 0.16, 0.36) or through email (38%, CI: 0.27, 0.49). Respondents acknowledged their expectations that researchers share information about their health and risk for disease and their concerns that their data could be shared with for-profit companies. We found no difference in respondent preferences for registries that shared contact information with researchers, compared to honest broker models that take extra precautions to protect registrant confidentiality (28% versus 30%; p = 0.46). Compared to those preferring a shared information model, respondents who preferred the honest broker model or who lacked model preference voiced increased concerns about sharing registrant data, especially with for-profit organizations. These results suggest that the design of potential participant registries may impact the population enrolled, and hence the population that will eventually be enrolled in clinical studies. Investigators operating registries may need to offer particular assurances about data security to maximize registry enrollment but also must carefully manage participant expectations.

Indexed as

AttitudeRegistriesAgedAgingBiomedical ResearchConfidentialityDementiaFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInternetLongitudinal StudiesMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesClinical trialrecruitmentregistries

Identifiers

PMID28106553
PMCPMC5533604
OpenAlexW2575612235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.