ArticleJournal of patient experience2021
Family Perspectives on Clinical Research for Pediatric Multiple Sclerosis: Enhancing Equity.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pediatric new drug trials are federally mandated, but family perspectives in multiple sclerosis (MS) research are limited. Due to MS chronicity and long-term medical system involvement, we obtained family views on research priorities and optimized methods for future studies. Focus groups were convened with families impacted by pediatric-onset MS. Recruitment included those followed by the Network of Pediatric MS Centers, geographically disparate locations, and centers' voluntary election. Study questions included: healthcare experiences, clinical trials perspectives, cognitive/psychosocial/educational outcomes, disease course and disability accrual. All subjects supported future clinical studies. Patients highlighted contribution to knowledge base but were wary of experimental medication and disease-course impeding activities. Parents underscored medication delivery modalities, side-effects, and limiting children's discomfort. All wanted study relevance made explicit. Suggested future study design elements included: providing compensation, limiting assumptions regarding outcome linkages, understanding study-related psychological impacts, and reducing participation burdens. Rare disease research can assist general medicine diagnosis and referral. Variable study designs and explicit rationale may augment participation. Closing the pediatric research gap requires family engagement in the research process.
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.