Trial reportClinical trials (London, England)2023
An example of implementing a safety protocol in remote intervention and survey research with college students.
Trial report in Clinical trials (London, England), 2023. 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, 0 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis article draws attention to the need for open evaluation and reporting on safety protocols in survey and intervention research. We describe a protocol for responding to those who indicate increased risk of self-harm (i.e. suicidality or potentially lethal alcohol use) as an example and report on the outcome of our procedures.
methodsParticipants were first-year college students (
resultsOf the 891 participants, 167 (18.7%) were identified as being at risk in one or more study wave. Of those, we were able to successfully contact 100 (59.9%), 76 (45.5%) by phone, and 24 (14.4%) by email. Of those 100, 78 accepted mental health resources as a result of outreach. Participant sex, attrition, and intervention condition were not related to risk. DISCUSSION: This article may aid other research teams in developing similar protocols. Strategies to reach an even greater proportion of high-risk participants are needed. A body of literature documenting published safety protocols in research and the associated outcomes would help to identify opportunities for improvement.
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.