ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2025
Factors influencing biospecimen collection in decentralized pregnancy and birth cohorts: A qualitative study.
Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Although decentralized research is being used more frequently, few data are available regarding barriers for potential subjects related to engaging in decentralized research with remote biospecimen collection, especially within pregnancy and birth cohorts that include individuals of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. Methods: Focus groups and individual interviews with pregnant and postpartum women were conducted in English and Spanish. Thematic analysis was used to identify motivators and barriers to participation in decentralized research involving biospecimens. Results: Sixty women (35% Hispanic/Latino, 23% Black, 18% Asian, 15% non-Hispanic White) participated in 10 focus groups (English = 8, Spanish = 2) and 11 individual interviews (English = 7, Spanish = 4). Three themes emerged about factors that could promote participation in decentralized biospecimen collection: 1) convenience, 2) autonomy, and 3) benefit (to self, community or society). Four themes emerged about potential barriers: 1) lack of interaction with trained professionals, 2) inability to coordinate with existing clinical care, 3) discomfort and invasiveness, and 4) concerns about data transparency and security. Overall, participants felt more comfortable providing biospecimens for themselves compared to their child and with biospecimens perceived as less painful or invasive to obtain. Discussion: Our findings suggest that transparency about the purposes and use of collecting biospecimen and clear instructions (such as written and instructional videos) could improve biospecimen collection in decentralized pregnancy and birth cohorts. Additionally, opportunities for virtual interaction with study staff and options related to collection of certain biospecimens such as blood (mobile collection unit with trained staff versus a self-collection device) may also improve participant engagement.
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.