Back to search

Article

The SHOW RESPECT adaptable framework of considerations for planning how to share trial results with participants, based on qualitative findings from trial participants and site staff

2024-04-30

Abstract excerpt

<title>Abstract</title> <p><bold>Background: </bold>Sharing trial results with participants is a moral imperative, but too often does not happen in appropriate ways. <bold>Methods: </bold>We carried out semi-structured interviews with patients (n=13) and site staff (n=11) who were part of the Show RESPECT study, which tested approaches to sharing results with participants in the context of the ICON8 ovarian cance...

Topics

Open a Topic to create a Post that cites this publication.

Identifiers and source

Literature Corpus work
b7c266b4-164d-5a50-9032-3de238bdbb2a
DOI
10.21203/rs.3.rs-3964506/v1
Open publication

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest
Interactive article relationship graphSelect a related publication card to move it into the centre and load its closest explainable connections. Solid lines are source-backed structured connections. Dashed lines are semantic discovery signals and are not scientific evidence.
The SHOW RESPECT adaptable framework of considerations for planning how to share trial results with participants, based on qualitative findings from trial participants and site staffDOI 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3964506/v1
Trial Forge Guidance 5: ethical considerations in randomised Studies Within A Trial (SWATs)Semantic proximity
The Impact of Patient Engagement on Trials and Trialists in Ontario, Canada: an Interview Study With IMPACT AwardeesSemantic proximity
Developing archetypes for key roles in a pragmatic trial: implementing human-centered design to promote advance care planning in primary careSemantic proximity
Classification of processes involved in sharing individual participant data from clinical trialsSemantic proximity
Selecting and collecting outcomes for clinical trials: an international qualitative study exploring stakeholder perspectivesSemantic proximity
Understanding the Experiences and Needs of Participants in Decentralised Clinical Trials: A Qualitative AnalysisSemantic proximity
Informed consent in randomised controlled trials: further development and evaluation of the Participatory and Informed Consent (PIC) measureSemantic proximity
International Multi-stakeholder Consensus Statement on Clinical Trial IntegritySemantic proximity
Mapping open educational resources on how to justify, design, conduct, analyse, and share randomised clinical trials: a landscape analysisSemantic proximity
Assessment of the Appropriateness of the i-CONSENT Guideline Recommendations for Improving Understanding of the Informed Consent Process in Clinical StudiesSemantic proximity
Development of a consensus extension of the estimands framework for cluster randomised trials (CRT-estimands): results from an international Delphi studySemantic proximity
Patient Values in Patient-Provider Communication about Participation in Early Phase Clinical Cancer Trials: a Qualitative Analysis before and after Implementation of an Online Value Clarification Tool InterventionSemantic proximity
Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.