Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39397541›Full record

ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE2024

Considerations for the Design of Informed Consent in Digital Health Research: Participant Perspectives.

Brian J McInnis, Ramona Pindus, Daniah Kareem, Camille Nebeker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors.

Brian J McInnisHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Ramona PindusHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Daniah KareemHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Camille NebekerHerbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6819-1796

Funding

UC San Diego Clinical and Translational Research InstituteUL1TR001442 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIRESTEIN, GARY S, HOGARTH, MICHAEL · 2015 to 2024
$88.3M
4/6 Planning for the HEALthy Early Development StudyR34DA050341 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI CHAMBERS, CHRISTINA · 2019 to 2020
$917k
NCATS NIH HHS ME-2020C3-21310NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001442NIDA NIH HHS R34 DA050341
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The research team, prospective participants, and written materials all influence the success of the informed consent process. As digital health research becomes more prevalent, new challenges for successful informed consent are introduced. This exploratory research utilized a human centered design process in which 19 people were enrolled to participate in one of four online focus-groups. Participants discussed their experiences with informed consent, preferences for receiving study information and ideas about alternative consent approaches. Data were analyzed using qualitative methods. Six major themes and sixteen sub-themes were identified that included study information that prospective participants would like to receive, preferences for accessing information and a desire to connect with research team members. Specific to digital health, participants expressed a need to understand how the technologies worked and how the volume of granular personal information would be collected, stored, and shared.

Indexed as

Focus GroupsInformed ConsentAdultAgedDigital HealthDigital TechnologyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchResearch DesignResearch Subjectsdigital healthhuman centered designinformed consentparticipant perspectivesresearch ethicsresearch ethics committee/IRB review

Identifiers

PMID39397541
PMCPMC11588507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.