Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42465045›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical and translational science2026

Preferences of research participants with experience receiving individual results for future return of results.

Paul S Appelbaum, Sheila Marie OByrne, Zirui Zhang, Wendy K Chung, George Hripcsak, Krzysztof Kiryluk, Chunhua Weng, Shing Lee, Nancy S Green

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical and translational science, 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

9 authors.

Paul S AppelbaumPsychiatry, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1940-0042
Sheila Marie OByrneIrving Institute for Clinical and Translational Science, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-2107-5152
Zirui ZhangBiostatistics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Wendy K ChungBoston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
George HripcsakBiomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Krzysztof KirylukMedicine, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Chunhua WengBiomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Shing LeeBiostatistics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8413-6869
Nancy S GreenPediatrics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9877-1561

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Research participants express strong desires to receive their individual research results (IRR), consistent with key ethical principles of research. Participants' preferences, especially when based on past experiences with IRR, can help in formulating approaches to the process. Methods: Participants ( Results: Respondents indicated that receiving results would be very important in their decisions about future studies; 64.9% gave it the highest importance rating. They wanted IRR to improve their own and their families' health. Concerns about risks were low. Most said they were likely to share the information with other people. Respondents preferred receiving results from health professionals associated with the study, as opposed to their own physicians. They favored return by email and videoconferencing, as opposed to in-person visits or mail. Respondents desired information in various formats to help them understand and act on the results. Conclusions: These results underscore the importance that research participants place on IRR and provide guidance on the best ways to provide them. A strength of these findings is that they reflect the experiences of respondents who already received IRR. Investigators should consider how best to offer IRR to their participants; funders should provide appropriate support for the process.

Indexed as

decision supportindividual research resultsparticipant preferencesresearch ethicsReturn of results

Identifiers

PMID42465045
PMCPMC13373603

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.