Trial reportHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2021
A public and patient consultation process as an aid to design a person-centred randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A public and patient consultation process as an aid to design a person-centred randomized clinical trial.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Trial
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
backgroundInvolving patients and members of the public, together with researchers, in decisions about how studies are designed and conducted can create a study that is more person-centred. The aim of this consultation process was to explore ways of designing a study which takes the person into consideration for the randomized clinical study entitled 'Biomechanical Effects of Manual Therapy-A Feasibility Study' using the novel approach of usability testing.
designPatient and public volunteers were sought with experience of low back pain. Volunteers were invited to participate in usability testing (a physical walkthrough) of the proposed study method. This was followed by a discussion of areas where usability testing could not be used, such as recruitment strategies, continuity of participant care and dissemination of results. Resulting feedback was considered by the research team and alterations to the original study method were incorporated, provided the research questions could be answered and were practical within the resources available.
resultsAdditional recruitment strategies were proposed. Alterations to the study included reduction in study time burden; completion of study paperwork in a quieter location; continuity of participant care after the study; and methods of dissemination of overall study results to participants.
conclusionThe consultation process used the unique method of usability testing, together with a post-usability discussion, and resulted in alterations to the future study which may facilitate making it more person-centred. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and public developed the future study design but did not participate in manuscript preparation.
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.