ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE
Ethical and Methodological Considerations for Evaluating Participant Views on Alzheimer's and Dementia Research.
Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advancing Remote Monitoring for Patients With Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias: Systematic Review.JMIR aging · 2025Pooled it
- Recruiting Persons With Dementia: A Systematic Review of Facilitators, Barriers, and Strategies.American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementiasPooled it
- Challenges and Strategies in Interviewing People With Acquired Brain Injury and Communication Impairment in Qualitative Interview Studies: A Secondary Analysis of Interview Data.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Article
- "Like Taking Part in Star Wars": Qualitative Study Using Thematic Analysis to Explore the Acceptability and Experiences of Older Adults Participating in Remote Longitudinal Sleep and Dementia Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Fitting a square peg in a round hole? A mixed-methods study on research ethics and collaborative health and social care research involving 'vulnerable' groups.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Standardised data collection from people with dementia over the telephone: A qualitative study of the experience of DETERMIND programme researchers in a pandemic.Dementia (London, England) · 2023Article
- A Qualitative Examination of Knowledge, Experiences, and Considerations of PET Brain Scan Participation Among Older Black and Latino Adults.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2023Article
- Accelerating diversity in Alzheimer's disease research by partnering with a community advisory board.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
- Stakeholders' Perspectives regarding Participation in Neuromodulation-Based Dementia Intervention Research.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHREArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The urgent need to expand enrollment in Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD) research has synergized calls for an empiric science of research recruitment, yet, progress in this area is hindered by challenges to measuring views toward ADRD research. This paper reports ethical and methodological considerations identified through a prospective qualitative study investigating ADRD patient and caregiver views on research recruitment and participation surrounding acute illness. Ethical and methodological considerations were identified through a combination of memoing, collaboration with a Community Advisory Board (CAB), and analysis of interview data from ADRD patients (
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.