Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29502043›Full record

Trial reportPsychiatry research2018

Assessing the subjective experience of participating in a clinical trial (AVATAR).

Jheanell Hall, Mar Rus-Calafell, Lorraine Omari-Asor, Thomas Ward, Richard Emsley, Philippa Garety, Tom K J Craig

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychiatry research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Avatar Therapy for people with schizophrenia or related disorders.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Jheanell HallDepartment of Health Services and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. Electronic address: jheanell.gabbidon@kcl.ac.uk.
Mar Rus-CalafellDepartment of Health Services and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Lorraine Omari-AsorDepartment of Health Services and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Thomas WardDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Richard EmsleyCentre for Biostatistics, Institute of Population Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Philippa GaretyDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Tom K J CraigDepartment of Health Services and Population Research, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 09827Wellcome Trust 098272
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study assessed the subjective experience of participating in a clinical trial, specifically positive and negative experiences and the experience of audio recording assessment sessions. The study was cross-sectional from a single blinded randomised controlled trial. Forty participants with a primary diagnosis of non-organic psychosis completed baseline and 12-week follow-up questionnaires assessing their experiences. Participants rated research interviews as moderately helpful in facilitating their therapy and talking to the interviewer as moderately helpful at baseline and 12-week follow-up. Self-report ratings of the degree of self-realisation promoted by the research questionnaires were significantly higher at 12-week follow-up compared to baseline. Participants adjusted quickly to being audio recorded and rated interviews as not at all disruptive and not at all to slightly intrusive. On average there were neutral emotional reactions, positive gains and minimal inconveniences as a result of participation. The main reasons for taking part were: 'To help myself', 'I was curious' and 'To help others'. The findings offer support to previous research reporting that individuals with mental health problems find participating in clinical trials a beneficial experience. This may alleviate concerns that participation in similar studies may be personally intrusive or harmful.

Indexed as

Diagnostic Self EvaluationAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInterview, PsychologicalMaleMiddle AgedPatient ParticipationPsychotic DisordersSelf ReportSingle-Blind MethodSurveys and QuestionnairesAudio recordingMental healthNegativeParticipatePositiveResearch

Identifiers

PMID29502043
PMCPMC7618152

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.