Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36534338›Full record

ArticleJournal of community genetics2023

Evaluating visual imagery for participant understanding of research concepts in genomics research.

Erin Rothwell, Naomi O Riches, Erin Johnson, Kimberly A Kaphingst, Kelsey Kehoe, Sabrina Malone Jenkins, Rachel Palmquist, Carrie Torr, Caren J Frost, Bob Wong and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of community genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

Erin RothwellDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. erin.rothwell@hsc.utah.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2294-2299
Naomi O RichesDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Erin JohnsonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Kimberly A KaphingstDepartment of Communication and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Kelsey KehoeDepartment of Psychology, University of Massachusetts Boston, Boston, MA, USA.
Sabrina Malone JenkinsDivision of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Rachel PalmquistDivision of Pediatric Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah School of Medicine; Center for Personalized Medicine, Primary Children's Hospital, Intermountain Healthcare, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Carrie TorrDivision of Pediatric Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah School of Medicine; Center for Personalized Medicine, Primary Children's Hospital, Intermountain Healthcare, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Caren J FrostCollege of Social Work, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Bob WongCollege of Nursing, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Joshua L BonkowskyDivision of Pediatric Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah School of Medicine; Center for Personalized Medicine, Primary Children's Hospital, Intermountain Healthcare, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.

Funding

Utah Trial Innovation CenterU24TR001597 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI DEAN, JONATHAN MICHAEL · 2016 to 2022
$39.6M
Utah Center for Clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR002538 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI HESS, RACHEL, MAJERSIK, JENNIFER JUHL · 2018 to 2022
$26.0M
Utah Center of Excellence in ELSI Research: UCEERRM1HG009037 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI ROTHWELL, ERIN, TABERY, JAMES · 2016 to 2024
$8.0M
NCATS NIH HHS TR001597NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002538NHGRI NIH HHS HG009037NHGRI NIH HHS RM1 HG009037
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Informed consent is crucial for participant understanding, engagement, and partnering for research. However, current written informed consents have significant limitations, particularly for complex topics such as genomics and biobanking. Our goal was to identify how participants visually conceptualize terminology used in genomics and biobanking research studies, which might provide a novel approach for informed consent. An online convenience sample was used from May to July 2020 to collect data. Participants were asked to draw 10 randomly chosen words out of 32 possible words commonly used in consent forms for genomics and biobanking research. An electronic application captured drawings that were downloaded into a qualitative software program for analysis. A total of 739 drawings by 269 participants were captured. Participants were mostly female (61.3%), eight different race/ethnicities were represented (15.6% Black, 13.8% Hispanic), and most had some college education (68.8%). Some words had consistent visual themes such as different types of risky activities for risk or consistent specific images such as a double helix for DNA. Several words were frequently misunderstood (e.g., ascend for assent), while others returned few submissions (e.g., phenotype or whole genome sequencing). We found that although some words used in genomics and biobanking research were visually conceptualized in a common fashion, but misunderstood or less well-known words had no, few, or mistaken drawings. Future research can explore the incorporation of visual images to improve participant comprehension during consent processes, and how to utilize visual imagery to address more challenging concepts.

Identifiers

PMID36534338
PMCPMC9947213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.