Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34167521›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2021

What does engagement mean to participants in longitudinal cohort studies? A qualitative study.

Cynthia A Ochieng, Joel T Minion, Andrew Turner, Mwenza Blell, Madeleine J Murtagh

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07699159 (Cohort Network for Adolescents and Youth With multipLe Mental Health Conditions), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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.

NCT07699159 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Cohort Network for Adolescents and Youth With multipLe Mental Health Conditions (CALM): A Master Observational Trial

TypeobservationalSponsorCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthRan2025 to 2028Enrolled1,620ConditionsMultiple Mental Health Conditions, Child Mental Health, Youth Mental Health
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Value Proposition of Coordinated Population Cohorts Across Africa.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Exome sequencing of UK birth cohorts.Wellcome open research · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Cynthia A OchiengPopulation Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK. c.ochieng@bristol.ac.uk.
Joel T MinionQualitative Research Lead, Health Technology Assessment Unit, Department of Community Health Sciences, O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Dr NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4Z6, Canada.
Andrew TurnerPopulation Health Sciences, University of Bristol, 9th Floor, Whitefriars, Lewins Mead, Bristol, BS1 2NT, UK.
Mwenza BlellSchool of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University, 18-20 Windsor Terrace, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE2 4HE, UK.
Madeleine J MurtaghSchool of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow, Adam Smith Building, Bute Gardens, Glasgow, G12 8RT, UK.
University of Bristol · GBAdam Smith Institute · GBNewcastle University · GBUniversity of Calgary · CA

Funding

Medical Research Council G1001799Medical Research Council G9815508Medical Research Council MC_PC_15018Medical Research Council MC_PC_19009Wellcome Trust 217065/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEngagement is important within cohort studies for a number of reasons. It is argued that engaging participants within the studies they are involved in may promote their recruitment and retention within the studies. Participant input can also improve study designs, make them more acceptable for uptake by participants and aid in contextualising research communication to participants. Ultimately it is also argued that engagement needs to provide an avenue for participants to feedback to the cohort study and that this is an ethical imperative. This study sought to explore the participants' experiences and thoughts of their engagement with their birth cohort study.

methodsParticipants were recruited from the Children of the 90s (CO90s) study. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 42 participants. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, and uploaded onto Nvivo software. They were then analysed via thematic analysis with a constant comparison technique.

resultsParticipants' experiences of their engagement with CO90s were broadly based on three aspects: communication they received from CO90s, experiences of ethical conduct from CO90s and receiving rewards from CO90s. The communication received from CO90s, ranged from newsletters explaining study findings and future studies, to more personal forms like annual greeting cards posted to each participant. Ethical conduct from CO90s mainly involved participants understanding that CO90s would keep their information confidential, that it was only involved in 'good' ethical research and their expectation that CO90s would always prioritise participant welfare. Some of the gifts participants said they received at CO90s included toys, shopping vouchers, results from clinical tests, and time off from school to attend data collection (Focus) days. Participants also described a temporality in their engagement with CO90s and the subsequent trust they had developed for the cohort study.

conclusionThe experiences of engagement described by participants were theorized as being based on reciprocity which was sometimes overt and other times more nuanced. We further provide empirical evidence of participants' expectation for a reciprocal interaction with their cohort study while highlighting the trust that such an interaction fosters. Our study therefore provides key insights for other cohort studies on what participants value in their interactions with their cohort studies.

Indexed as

CommunicationChildCohort StudiesHumansLongitudinal StudiesQualitative ResearchALSPACBiobankEngagementLongitudinal cohort studiesParticipant experienceParticipant involvement

Identifiers

PMID34167521
PMCPMC8223352
OpenAlexW3171342080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.