Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40888431›Full record

ArticleThe Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association2026

Participant Perspectives on Data Sharing in Clinical Craniofacial Research: Qualitative Interviews With Participants With Craniofacial Microsomia and Their Caregivers.

Stephanie A Kraft, Laura Stueckle, Elsa Ayala, Abril Beretta, Carrie L Heike

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Ethical Considerations for Clinical Data Sharing in Craniofacial Research: Recommendations From a Multidisciplinary Working Group.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026
    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

5 authors.

Stephanie A KraftDepartment of Bioethics and Decision Sciences, Geisinger College of Health Sciences, Danville, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2862-7601
Laura StueckleCenter for Clinical and Translational Research, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1379-8253
Elsa AyalaTreuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics and Palliative Care, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-0043-7978
Abril BerettaTreuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics and Palliative Care, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0009-0007-9067-9107
Carrie L HeikeCenter for Clinical and Translational Research, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2178-7730

Funding

Craniofacial microsomia: Accelerating Research and Education (CARE)R01DE029510 · NIDCR · SEATTLE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL · PI HEIKE, CARRIE LYN, STOCK, NICOLA · 2020 to 2024
$3.2M
NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE029510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

ObjectiveTo describe the perspectives of participants and caregivers of pediatric participants on data sharing in clinical craniofacial research.DesignQualitative interview study of research participants' attitudes about data sharing.SettingOne-to-one interviews via web conferencing.Patients, ParticipantsAdults (n = 7) and adolescents (n = 8) with craniofacial microsomia and caregivers (n = 20) of children with craniofacial microsomia who previously participated in clinical craniofacial research.InterventionsSemistructured interview guide addressing 4 main topics: (1) expectations about data collection and sharing; (2) preferences and limitations for data sharing; (3) consent/assent language; and (4) gaps and future needs.Main Outcome Measure(s)We iteratively developed a qualitative codebook based on inductive interview transcript review and conducted a thematic analysis of coded data.ResultsWe identified 5 themes within participants' descriptions of their attitudes about data sharing: (1) participants hope that research participation and data sharing will advance science for the benefit of the craniofacial community; (2) sharing images is broadly recognized as important for craniofacial research but raises discomfort for some; (3) participants generally view broad data sharing and use positively but raise concerns focused on harm to the craniofacial community; (4) trustworthy researchers and data protections provide reassurance for sharing data; and (5) decisions about pediatric data sharing are complex in the context of developing autonomy.ConclusionsThese findings illustrate ethical complexities for data sharing in clinical craniofacial research related to balancing community-oriented benefits and risks, providing control over sharing images, ensuring researcher trustworthiness, and respecting a child's future autonomy interests.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchCaregiversGoldenhar SyndromeInformation DisseminationAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansInformed ConsentInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative Researchdata sharingdeidentificationethics/health policiesfacial imagesparental perceptionpediatric clinical researchpediatricsphotosprivacyresearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID40888431
PMCPMC12455614

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.