Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42113850›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Co-developing a survey on public understanding of sustainable clinical research: A study protocol.

Dylan Keegan, Linda O'Neill, Peter Doran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Dylan KeeganClinical Research Centre, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0863-4222
Linda O'NeillClinical Research Centre, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0109-9650
Peter DoranClinical Research Centre, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical research is essential for medical advancement but contributes to carbon emissions through activities such as travel, data management, and laboratory processes. As healthcare systems move towards net-zero targets, there is a growing need to understand public awareness of and attitudes towards environmental sustainability in clinical research. Public and patient involvement (PPI) can enhance the relevance and acceptability of research, however there is limited evidence on how best to co-develop tools to assess public understanding of sustainable clinical research.

methodsThis study is a two-phase protocol. Phase I involves the co-development of an anonymous online survey with PPI partners through two structured workshops. Survey themes, topics, questions and format will be agreed collaboratively, and the co-development process will be evaluated using qualitative data collected during the workshops. These data will be analysed thematically, using Braun & Clarke's (2006) framework. Phase II involves distribution of the survey to clinical research, patient and public networks using an online platform. Survey data will be analysed using descriptive statistics for quantitative data and inductive content analysis for qualitative responses. DISCUSSION: This study will generate a co-developed survey instrument and provide insights into public understanding of sustainable clinical research. Reporting on both the survey findings and the PPI co-development process will inform future research and support the development of sustainable research clinical practices.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchPublic OpinionHumansPatient ParticipationResearch DesignSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID42113850
PMCPMC13160332

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.