Trial reportAmerican journal of ophthalmology2019
Motivations and Decision Making Processes of Men With X-linked Retinoschisis Considering Participation in an Ocular Gene Therapy Trial.
Trial report in American journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Navigating the decision landscape: understanding interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome patients' motivations and medical support needs for fecal microbiota transplantation: a qualitative research.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2025Article
- Patient Perceptions of Emerging Gene Therapies for Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy.Circulation. Genomic and precision medicine · 2024Article
- Peripapillary retinal nerve fibre layer thinning in patients with X-linked retinoschisis.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2024Article
- A multinational survey of potential participant perspectives on ocular gene therapy.Gene therapy · 2024Article
- Influences on clinical trial participation: Enhancing recruitment through a gender lens - A scoping review.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2024Article
- Survey of perspectives of people with inherited retinal diseases on ocular gene therapy in Australia.Gene therapy · 2023Article
- Measurement Properties of the Attitudes to Gene Therapy for the Eye (AGT-Eye) Instrument for People With Inherited Retinal Diseases.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
- Perspectives of people with inherited retinal diseases on ocular gene therapy in Australia: protocol for a national survey.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Motivations and Decision-Making of Adult Sickle Cell Patients in High-Risk Clinical Research.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2020Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo describe the motivations, expectations, and other factors men with X-linked retinoschisis (XLRS) consider when making decisions to participate in an early phase ocular gene therapy clinical trial.
designQualitative interview study.
methodsMen with XLRS who were considering participation in a phase I/IIa ocular gene therapy clinical trial at the National Eye Institute were eligible for this study. Trial participants (n = 9) were interviewed prior to receiving the gene transfer and then at 3 and 12 months later. Trial participation decliners (n = 2) were interviewed at an initial visit and 12 months later. Those screened for the trial and found ineligible (n = 2) were interviewed at an initial visit only. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed thematically.
resultsInterview participants described decision making factors as risk-benefit assessments, personal intuition, trust in the study team, and religious faith. Altruism and the potential for therapeutic benefit were the main motives for trial participation, whereas the uncertainty of risks and benefits was the reason 2 men declined participation. Although most participants hoped for direct benefit, no one expected to benefit. Almost all interview participants considered their decision straightforward and were satisfied with their decision when interviewed over time. Meaningful relationships with the study team and perceived secondary benefits to participation contributed to positive trial experiences.
conclusionsEngaging prospective research participants in a discussion about their hopes, expectations, and personal factors provides a more complete understanding of patient decision making and may help support informed choices to participate in clinical trials for XLRS.
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.