ArticlePloS one2025
Experiences of participants in ETEC controlled human infection model studies.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Motivations and experiences in controlled human infection trials vs. phase I clinical trials: a survey study.BMC medical ethics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundControlled human infection model (CHIM) studies raise ethical issues due to intentional exposure of healthy volunteers to a pathogen. In this study we examine the experiences of participants who have chosen to participate in enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) CHIM studies in a single research center.
methodsAn interviewer-administered paper-based survey was conducted with participants in an ETEC CHIM study at the Center for Immunization Research (CIR) from 2009-2020. We analyzed participant characteristics, study experiences, and perceived risks before and after study participation.
results48 participants in ETEC studies were interviewed. 81.3% of participants identified as Black or African American, 43.8% completed at most high school, and 39.6% of interviewees had incomes of less than $18,500 in the last year. Most respondents enjoyed participating and were glad they joined. Participants most frequently identified interactions with research staff, compensation, and food quality as the most positive aspects of their experiences. There was a significant reduction in the perceived risk of the ETEC study after completing participation compared to perceived risk before joining.
conclusionsDespite the expected side effects of ETEC CHIM studies, most participants believe the benefits outweigh the risks and would participate again.
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.