Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40331685›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025

Preventing fraudulent research participation: Methodological strategies and ethical impacts.

Cassie Mayer, Rebecca Tryon, Sarah Ricks, Kara Lane, Emma Van Hook, Kimberly Zayhowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Cultivating Authentic Partnership: Cooperative Development of a Toolkit to Mitigate Group Harm in Biorepository-Enabled Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors.

Cassie MayerMaster's Program in Genetic Counseling, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-1468-0596
Rebecca TryonDivision of Pediatric Blood and Marrow Transplant, M Health Fairview, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4504-128X
Sarah RicksDivision of Human Genetics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-9929-954X
Kara LaneDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-9837-8035
Emma Van HookMaster's Program in Genetic Counseling, Boston University Chobanian and Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0009-0007-5392-8960
Kimberly ZayhowskiDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1712-6403

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article addresses a growing issue in genetic counseling research: the participation of individuals who falsify demographic information or experiences to qualify for studies, often motivated by remuneration. This issue is particularly pressing in studies using social media recruitment, where detecting fraudulent participants has become increasingly difficult. The prevalence of inaccurate data raises serious questions about the integrity, reliability, and validity of research findings. We explore potential sources of participant fraud and inconsistency informed by prior, direct experience with fraudulent participants, discussing various strategies to strengthen participant screening, data validation, and interview protocols. We also examine the challenges screening methods pose for marginalized communities, who may already harbor distrust in research or face privacy concerns. We emphasize the need for transparent, responsible approaches to participant verification and advocate for developing standardized guidelines to protect both research quality and participant rights. By promoting trust, inclusivity, and fairness in research practices, we aim to preserve the dignity of participants and ensure that genetic counseling research remains rigorous. Ultimately, we call for collective action to reinforce the integrity of research and enhance its impact on clinical practice, ensuring that evidence-based insights guide patient-centered care.

Indexed as

FraudGenetic CounselingHumansdata accuracyfraudulent participantsgenetic counselingonline recruitmentqualitative researchquantitative researchresearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID40331685
PMCPMC12057331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.