ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2021
Pediatric Trials Network: Stakeholder views on thanking families and providing study findings on pragmatic pediatric clinical research.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Experiences and perspectives of children and adolescents participating in pediatric clinical trials: a qualitative evidence synthesis.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Pooled it
- Plain language summaries: A systematic review of theory, guidelines and empirical research.PloS one · 2022Pooled it
- Developing lay summaries and thank you notes in paediatric pragmatic clinical trials.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted formative research using in-depth interviews to identify preferences for and anticipated responses to receiving thank you notes and lay summaries of aggregate results among caregivers and adolescent participants of pragmatic pediatric studies conducted by the National Institute of Health-sponsored Pediatric Trials Network. We analyzed the data using qualitative thematic analysis. Nearly all participants said receiving a thank you note would make them feel valued, appreciated, and proud because they contributed to science. Similarly, nearly all participants said that receiving a lay summary of research results would make them aware of their role in improving the lives of children, feel like they are an active partner in research, and believe that researchers want to keep them informed. Participants also said that receiving a thank you note or lay summary may motivate them to participate in future research. Providing thank you notes as part of study participation should become a standard clinical trial practice, similar to the practice of providing lay summaries.
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.