ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2025
Patient and Healthcare Professional Reflections on Consenting for Extra Bone Marrow Samples to a Biobank for Research-A Qualitative Study.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biosample Donation Intentions of Patients with Infectious Disease Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Qualitative Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Little is known about patient perspectives regarding consent for obtaining extra research-specific bone marrow (BM) samples during the diagnostic procedure for acute leukemia (AL). This study aimed to better understand patient experiences with consenting to provide these samples and identify potential areas for practice improvement. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients treated for AL, 4-6 years prior to the interviews, and healthcare professionals involved with obtaining patient consent and sample collection. A total of 17 patients (14 agreed to provide a sample and 3 did not have a sample in the biobank) and 5 healthcare professionals were interviewed, achieving data saturation. Patients supported increasing public knowledge about research and noted the importance of friends and family in providing emotional support and retaining information. Despite time pressure and anxiety, the decision to donate a research sample did not require much deliberation. Proximal factors informing decisions included impact on patient health and family and anticipated, procedure-associated pain; distal factors included altruism and trust in healthcare professionals. Key information included expected pain and management, the purpose of research samples, and sample security and privacy. Our findings suggest that BM research sample collection may be facilitated through optimizing the environment where information is provided and the type of information provided, including pain management options and the value of the samples for current and future research.
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.