ArticleBMC medical ethics2021
What does engagement mean to participants in longitudinal cohort studies? A qualitative study.
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.
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.
Cohort Network for Adolescents and Youth With multipLe Mental Health Conditions (CALM): A Master Observational Trial
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Descriptions of risks and benefits of HIV vaccine trials in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs): an integrative review.BMC medical ethics · 2025Pooled it
- Participant recruitment and retention in a longitudinal study: experience from SARS-CoV-2 cohort in Ethiopia.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Observational
- Parent and child experiences of research participation and retention intentions in a Japanese birth cohort: insights from the Japan Environment and Children's Study (JECS).Environmental health and preventive medicine · 2026Article
- The development of an online intellectual humility intervention for religious or spiritual conflict.Internet interventions · 2025Article
- Long-Term Engagement of Diverse Study Cohorts in Decentralized Research: Longitudinal Analysis of "All of Us" Research Program Data.Interactive journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Perspective on Using Artificial Intelligence in Alcohol Research and Treatment: Opportunities and Ethical Considerations.Alcohol research : current reviews · 2025Review
- Participant engagement in a national longitudinal study of COVID-19: Insights from the INSPIRE study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Participant engagement and involvement in longitudinal cohort studies: qualitative insights from a selection of pregnancy and birth, twin, and family-based population cohort studies.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- The Value Proposition of Coordinated Population Cohorts Across Africa.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2024Review
- Article
- Measuring the Impact of Patient Engagement in Health Research: An Exploratory Study Using Multiple Survey Tools.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Exome sequencing of UK birth cohorts.Wellcome open research · 2024Article
- Between data providers and concerned citizens: Exploring participation in precision public health in Switzerland.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2024Article
- Demonstrating the learning and impact of embedding participant involvement in a pandemic research study: the experience of the SARS-CoV-2 immunity & reinfection evaluation (SIREN) study UK, 2020-2023.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Asynchronous online focus groups for research with people living with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and family caregivers: usefulness, acceptability and lessons learned.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
- Evaluating Levels of Community Participation in a University-Community Partnership: The Jackson Heart Study.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Safe and Healthy Para sport project (SHAPE): a study protocol of a complex intervention within Para sport.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2022Article
- Engaged genomic science produces better and fairer outcomes: an engagement framework for engaging and involving participants, patients and publics in genomics research and healthcare implementation.Wellcome open research · 2021Article
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
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
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.