ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2024
Communicating research findings as a return of value to All of Us Research Program participants: insights from staff at Federally Qualified Health Centers.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Returning value to communities from the All of Us Research Program through innovative approaches for data use, analysis, dissemination, and research capacity building.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Misaligned Expectations: Motivations of Medically Underserved People to Enroll in the All of Us Research Program.Ethics & human researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesResearch participants value learning how their data contributions are advancing health research (ie, data stories). The All of Us Research Program gathered insights from program staff to learn what research topics they think are of interest to participants, what support staff need to communicate data stories, and how staff use data story dissemination tools. MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing an online 25-item assessment, we collected information from All of Us staff at 7 Federally Qualified Health Centers.
resultsTopics of greatest interest or relevance included income insecurity (83%), diabetes (78%), and mental health (78%). Respondents prioritized in-person outreach in the community (70%) as a preferred setting to share data stories. Familiarity with available dissemination tools varied. DISCUSSION: Responses support prioritizing materials for in-person outreach and training staff how to use dissemination tools.
conclusionThe findings will inform All of Us communication strategy, content, materials, and staff training resources to effectively deliver data stories as return of value to participants.
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.