scholarly journals Disclosure of research results to research participants: A pilot study of the needs and attitudes of adolescents and parents

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 827-842
Author(s):  
Anya E.R. Prince ◽  
John M. Conley ◽  
Arlene M. Davis ◽  
Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz ◽  
R. Jean Cadigan

The growing practice of returning individual results to research participants has revealed a variety of interpretations of the multiple and sometimes conflicting duties that researchers may owe to participants. One particularly difficult question is the nature and extent of a researcher’s duty to facilitate a participant’s follow-up clinical care by placing research results in the participant’s medical record. The question is especially difficult in the context of genomic research. Some recent genomic research studies — enrolling patients as participants — boldly address the question with protocols dictating that researchers place research results directly into study participants’ existing medical records, without participant consent. Such privileging of researcher judgment over participant choice may be motivated by a desire to discharge a duty that researchers perceive themselves as owing to participants. However, the underlying ethical, professional, legal, and regulatory duties that would compel or justify this action have not been fully explored.


2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-390
Author(s):  
Sarunas Sniras ◽  
Romualdas Malinauskas

Data which would reveal the importance and level of moral skills of schoolchildren are still lacking. This research investigated children in 2 age groups and was based on the Moral Skills Inventory (Bakutyte, 1999). For the present study, this inventory was adapted after carrying out a pilot study at one middle school in Kaunas, Lithuania. Subjects were chosen by a random selection method in the Lithuanian middle schools of Kaunas, Klaipeda and Vilnius. Schoolchildren were questionned in the age groups 10 to 12 (258) and 13 to 15 (294) respectively. Our research results prove that schoolchildren aged from 13 to 15 try very hard to be sensitive towards others: and are trying much harder to console to a statiscally significant extent (p<.05) in comparison to the 10 to 12 age group.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Emily Christofides ◽  
Karla Stroud ◽  
Diana Elizabeth Tullis ◽  
Kieran C. O’Doherty

The practice of communicating research findings to participants has been identified as important in the research ethics literature, but little research has examined empirically how this occurs and what research participants’ views are in this regard. We interviewed 21 adults with cystic fibrosis who had previously participated in research and 2 research coordinators at a cystic fibrosis clinic. We aimed to better understand research participants’ views on receiving research results, types of findings they are interested in, how they would like to receive this information, and the impact this might have on future participation. Participants reported that they do not generally recall receiving study findings, though many reported that they would like to receive them. While some participants were not interested in receiving results, all participants felt that these results should be provided when desired by participants and believed that receiving study findings would support future participation. Participants felt that an accessible format, such as a lay summary, would be most helpful. This study supports calls to make study findings available to participants, though the format in which they are provided requires consideration. Participants rarely recalled receiving findings despite the clinic in which this study was conducted returning them regularly. Therefore, questions pertaining to the provision of study findings must focus less on whether to share the findings and more on how to share them with participants most effectively. The logistics of providing study findings may be challenging in some cases, but participant support for the practice highlights its importance.


2014 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. P812-P812 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Gooblar ◽  
Catherine M. Roe ◽  
Natalie J. Selsor ◽  
Matthew Gabel ◽  
John Morris

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 582-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher R Long ◽  
M Kathryn Stewart ◽  
Thomas V Cunningham ◽  
T Scott Warmack ◽  
Pearl A McElfish

Author(s):  
Hiroshi Kawame ◽  
Akimune Fukushima ◽  
Nobuo Fuse ◽  
Fuji Nagami ◽  
Yoichi Suzuki ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document