Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39773676›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Urban-Suburban Differences in Public Perspectives on Digitalizing Pediatric Research: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

Heping Fang, Ruoling Xian, Juan Li, Yingcun Li, Enmei Liu, Yan Zhao, Yan Hu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Heping FangDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Pediatric Research Institute, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Child Rare Diseases in Infection and Immunity, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Development and Disorders, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Disorders, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2064-1169
Ruoling XianDepartment of Pediatrics, Chongqing Health Center for Women and Children, Women and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5173-7315
Juan LiDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Pediatric Research Institute, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Child Rare Diseases in Infection and Immunity, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Development and Disorders, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Disorders, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2937-9192
Yingcun LiDepartment of General Surgery, Beijing Children's Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Center for Children's Health, Beijing, China.ORCID 0009-0009-4646-6918
Enmei LiuDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Pediatric Research Institute, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Child Rare Diseases in Infection and Immunity, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Development and Disorders, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Disorders, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8503-6974
Yan Zhao *Department of Pediatrics, Chongqing Health Center for Women and Children, Women and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0009-0007-0827-745X
Yan Hu *Department of Child Health Care, Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing Key Laboratory of Child Rare Diseases in Infection and Immunity, Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Child Development and Disorders, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health and Disorders, Chongqing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-0180-2764

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecruiting and retaining participants in pediatric research has always been challenging, particularly in healthy populations and remote areas, leading to selection bias and increased health disparities. In the digital age, medical research has been transformed by digital tools, offering new opportunities to enhance engagement in clinical research. However, public perspectives on digitalizing pediatric research and potential differences between urban and suburban areas remain unclear.

objectiveThis study aimed to investigate public perspectives on digitalizing pediatric research and compare differences between urban and suburban areas to help diversify participants and address health disparities.

methodsA cross-sectional web-based survey targeting caregivers of kindergarten children (aged 2-7 years) in Chongqing was conducted between June and December 2023. A total of 4231 valid questionnaires were analyzed, with 25.1% (n=1064) of the children residing in urban areas and 74.9% (n=3167) in suburban areas. Descriptive statistics and intergroup comparisons were used for data analysis.

resultsApproximately 59.8% (n=2531) of the caregivers had first impressions of pediatric research, with 36.9% (n=1561) being positive and 22.9% (n=970) being negative. A total of 38.3% (n=1621) of caregivers recognized the growing popularity of digital tools, and 36.7% (n=1552) supported their use in pediatric research, but only 25.2% (n=1068) favored online-only research methods. The main concerns regarding the use of software in pediatric research were privacy issues (n=3273, 77.4%) and potential addiction (n=2457, 58.1%). Public accounts of research institutions (n=3400, 80.4%) were the most favored for online recruitment. Telephones (1916/3076, 62.3%) and social media apps (1801/3076, 58.6%) were the most popular for regular contact. Intergroup comparisons revealed that suburban caregivers had more positive first impressions of pediatric research (38.6% vs 32%; P<.001; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.27, 95% CI 1.09-1.47) and faced fewer participation barriers: "worry about being an experimental subject" (70.9% vs 76.6%; P<.001; aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67-0.93), "pose a risk to children's health" (58.6% vs 67.8%; P<.001; aOR 0.71, 95% CI 0.61-0.83), "do not have enough background information" (55.2% vs 61.6%; P<.001; aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67-0.89), and "worry about recommending other products" (48.2% vs 55%; P<.001; aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67-0.89). They also showed greater support for online-only research methods (26% vs 22.9%; P=.045; aOR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01-1.41) and greater openness to unofficial online recruitment sources (social media friends: 24.7% vs 18.9%; P<.001; aOR 1.33, 95% CI 1.11-1.59; moments on social media: 15.5% vs 11.1%; P<.001; aOR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67).

conclusionsIn the digital age, enhancing recruitment and retention in pediatric research can be achieved by integrating both official and unofficial social media strategies, implementing a hybrid online-offline follow-up approach, and addressing privacy concerns.

Indexed as

Urban PopulationAdultCaregiversChildChild, PreschoolChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePediatricsPublic OpinionSuburban PopulationSurveys and Questionnairescaregiver attitudesdigital healthmobile phonepatient participationpediatric researchpediatricspublic opinionresearchruralsocial mediaurban

Identifiers

PMID39773676
PMCPMC11751655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.