Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Characterizing health researcher barriers to sharing results with study participants

  • Pearl A. McElfish (a1), Christopher R. Long (a1), Laura P. James (a2), Aaron J. Scott (a3), Elizabeth Flood-Grady (a4), Kim S. Kimminau (a5), Robert L. Rhyne (a6), Mark R. Burge (a7) and Rachel S. Purvis (a3)...

Abstract

Introduction:

Research participants want to receive results from studies in which they participate. However, health researchers rarely share the results of their studies beyond scientific publication. Little is known about the barriers researchers face in returning study results to participants.

Methods:

Using a mixed-methods design, health researchers (N = 414) from more than 40 US universities were asked about barriers to providing results to participants. Respondents were recruited from universities with Clinical and Translational Science Award programs and Prevention Research Centers.

Results:

Respondents reported the percent of their research where they experienced each of the four barriers to disseminating results to participants: logistical/methodological, financial, systems, and regulatory. A fifth barrier, investigator capacity, emerged from data analysis. Training for research faculty and staff, promotion and tenure incentives, and funding agencies supporting dissemination of results to participants were solutions offered to overcoming barriers.

Conclusions:

Study findings add to literature on research dissemination by documenting health researchers’ perceived barriers to sharing study results with participants. Implications for policy and practice suggest that additional resources and training could help reduce dissemination barriers and increase the return of results to participants.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Characterizing health researcher barriers to sharing results with study participants
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Characterizing health researcher barriers to sharing results with study participants
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Characterizing health researcher barriers to sharing results with study participants
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: P. A. McElfish, PhD, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Northwest, 1125 N. College Ave, Fayetteville, AR 72703, USA. Email: pamcelfish@uams.edu

References

Hide All
1. Tarrant, C, et al. Consent revisited: the impact of return of results on participants’ views and expectations about trial participation. Health Expectations 2015; 18(6): 20422053.
2. Partridge, AH, et al. Offering participants results of a clinical trial: sharing results of a negative study. Lancet 2005; 365(9463): 963964.
3. Fernandez, CV, et al. Providing research results to participants: attitudes and needs of adolescents and parents of children with cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2009; 27(6): 878883.
4. Baylor, A, et al. Dissemination of research findings to research participants living with HIV in Rural Uganda: challenges and rewards. PLOS Medicine 2013; 10(3): 4.
5. Trinidad, SB, et al. Community dissemination and genetic research: moving beyond results reporting. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A 2015; 167(7): 15421550.
6. Purvis, R, et al. Qualitative study of participants’ perceptions and preferences regarding research dissemination. American Journal of Bioethics 2017; 8(2): 6974.
7. Long, CR, et al. Health research participants’ preferences for receiving research results. Clinical Trials 2016; 13(6): 582591.
8. Partridge, AH, Winer, EP. Informing clinical trial participants about study results. JAMA 2002; 288(3): 363365.
9. Chen, PG, et al. Dissemination of results in community-based participatory research. American Journal of Preventive Medicines 2010; 39(4): 372378.
10. Fernandez, C, et al. Offering to return results to research participants: attitudes and needs of principal investigators in the Children’s Oncology Group. Journal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology 2003; 25(9): 704708.
11. Partridge, AH, et al. Oncology physician and nurse practices and attitudes regarding offering clinical trial results to study participants. Journal of National Cancer Institute 2004; 96(8): 629632.
12. Rigby, H, Fernandez, CV. Providing research results to study participants: support versus practice of researchers presenting at the American Society of Hematology annual meeting. Blood 2005; 106(4): 11991202.
13. Wilson, PM, et al. Does dissemination extend beyond publication: a survey of a cross section of public funded research in the UK. Implementation Science 2010; 5: 61.
14. McCormack, L, et al. Communication and Dissemination Strategies to Facilitate the Use of Health-Related Evidence. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2013. Evidence Reports/Technology Assessments No. 213.
15. Brownson, RC, et al. Designing for dissemination among public health researchers: findings from a national survey in the United States. American Journal of Public Health 2013; 103(9): 16931699.
16. Cox, K, et al. Feedback of trial results to participants: a survey of clinicians’ and patients’ attitudes and experiences. European Journal of Oncology Nursing 2011; 15(2): 124129.
17. Bergman, M. Advances in Mixed Methods Research: Theories and Applications. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2008.
18. Creswell, JW. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2013.
19. Creswell, JW, Plano Clark, VL. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2010.
20. Creswell, J, et al. Advanced mixed methods research designs. In: Tashakkori, A, Teddlie, C, eds. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2003: 209240.
21. Johnson, R, Onweugbuzie, A, Turner, L. Toward a definitions of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 2007; 1(2): 112133.
22. Johnson, R, Onwuegbuzie, A. Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher 2004; 33(7): 1426.
23. Sale, JE, Lohfeld, LH, Brazil, K. Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: implications for mixed-methods research. Quality and Quantity 2002; 36(1): 4353.
24. McElfish, PA, Purvis, RS, Long, CR. Researchers’ experiences with and perceptions of returning results to participants: study protocol. Contemp Clinical Trials Communications 2018; 11: 9598.
25. Long, C, et al. Health researchers’ experiences, perceptions, and barriers related to sharing study results with participants. Health Research Policy and Systems 2019; 17(2 5): 111.
26. National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA). https://ncats.nih.gov/ctsa/about. Accessed February 15, 2018.
27. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevention Research Centers. https://www.cdc.gov/prc/index.htm. Accessed February 15, 2018.
28. Harris, P, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. Journal of Biomedical Infromatics 2009; 42(2): 377381.
29. Shalowitz, DI, Miller, FG. Communicating the results of clinical research to participants: attitudes, practices, and future directions. PLOS Medicine 2008; 5(5): e91.
30. Fernandez, C, Skedgel, C, Weijer, C. Considerations and costs of disclosing study findings to research participants. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2004; 170(9): 14171419.
31. King, N, Cassell, C, Symon, G. Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. In: Cassell, C, Symon, G, eds. Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2004.
32. Nadin, S, Cassell, C. Using data matrices. In: Cassell, C, Symon, G, eds. Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2004.
33. Tong, A, Sainsbury, P, Craig, J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2007; 19(6): 349357.
34. Hennink, M, Hutter, I, Bailey, A. Qualitative Research Methods. London, Los Angeles, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage Publications, 2011.
35. Schimanski, LA Alperin, JP. The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future. F1000Research 2018; 7(1605): 121.
36. Marrero, DG, et al. Promotion and tenure for community-engaged research: an examination of promotion and tenure support for community-engaged research at three universities collaborating through a Clinical and Translational Science Award. Clinical and Translational Science 2013; 6(3): 204208.
37. McElfish, P, et al. Health research funding agencies’ policies, recommendations, and tools for dissemination. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action 2018; 12(4): 473482.
38. Curran, D, Kekewich, M, Foreman, T. Examining the use of consent forms to promote dissemination of research results to participants. Research Ethics 2018; 15: 12 8.
39. Markman, M. Providing research participants with findings from completed cancer-related clinical trials: not quite as simple as it sounds. Cancer 2006; 106(7): 14211424.
40. MacNeil, SD, Fernandez, CV. Attitudes of research ethics board chairs towards disclosure of research results to participants: results of a national survey. Journal of Medical Ethics 2007; 33(9): 549553.
41. Multi-Regional Clinical Trials Center of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard. Return of Aggregate Results to Participants Principles. Cambridge, MA,: Harvard University; 201 7.
42. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services TSsA, Protections CoHR. Sharing Study Data and Results: Return of Individual Results (Attachment B), 2016.
43. The National Academies of Sciences E, and Medicine. Returning Individual Research Results to Participants: Guidance for a New Research Paradigm, 2018.

Keywords

Characterizing health researcher barriers to sharing results with study participants

  • Pearl A. McElfish (a1), Christopher R. Long (a1), Laura P. James (a2), Aaron J. Scott (a3), Elizabeth Flood-Grady (a4), Kim S. Kimminau (a5), Robert L. Rhyne (a6), Mark R. Burge (a7) and Rachel S. Purvis (a3)...

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed