Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2022
Reasons for participation in a child development study: Are cases with developmental diagnoses different from controls?
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bradley Chyrise B, Tapia Amanda L, DiGuiseppi Carolyn G, Kepner Marti W, Kloetzer Joy M, Schieve Laura A, Wiggins Lisa D, Windham Gayle C, Daniels Julie L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Current knowledge about parental reasons for allowing child participation in research comes mainly from clinical trials. Fewer data exist on parents' motivations to enrol children in observational studies.
OBJECTIVES: Describe reasons parents of preschoolers gave for participating in the Study to Explore Early Development (SEED), a US multi-site study of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and other developmental delays or disorders (DD), and explore reasons given by child diagnostic and behavioural characteristics at enrolment.
METHODS: We included families of children, age 2-5 years, participating in SEED (n = 5696) during 2007-2016. We assigned children to groups based on characteristics at enrolment: previously diagnosed ASD; suspected ASD; non-ASD DD; and population controls (POP). During a study interview, we asked parents their reasons for participating. Two coders independently coded responses and resolved discrepancies via consensus. We fit binary mixed-effects models to evaluate associations of each reason with group and demographics, using POP as reference.
RESULTS: Participants gave 1-5 reasons for participation (mean = 1.7, SD = 0.7). Altruism (48.3%), ASD research interest (47.4%) and perceived personal benefit (26.9%) were most common. Two novel reasons were knowing someone outside the household with the study conditions (peripheral relationship; 14.1%) and desire to contribute to a specified result (1.4%). Odds of reporting interest in ASD research were higher among diagnosed ASD participants (odds ratio [OR] 2.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.49-3.35). Perceived personal benefit had higher odds among diagnosed (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.61-2.29) or suspected ASD (OR 3.67, 95% CI 2.99-4.50) and non-ASD DD (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.50-2.16) participants. Peripheral relationship with ASD/DD had lower odds among all case groups.
CONCLUSIONS: We identified meaningful differences between groups in parent-reported reasons for participation. Differences demonstrate an opportunity for future studies to tailor recruitment materials and increase the perceived benefit for specific prospective participants.
OBJECTIVES: Describe reasons parents of preschoolers gave for participating in the Study to Explore Early Development (SEED), a US multi-site study of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and other developmental delays or disorders (DD), and explore reasons given by child diagnostic and behavioural characteristics at enrolment.
METHODS: We included families of children, age 2-5 years, participating in SEED (n = 5696) during 2007-2016. We assigned children to groups based on characteristics at enrolment: previously diagnosed ASD; suspected ASD; non-ASD DD; and population controls (POP). During a study interview, we asked parents their reasons for participating. Two coders independently coded responses and resolved discrepancies via consensus. We fit binary mixed-effects models to evaluate associations of each reason with group and demographics, using POP as reference.
RESULTS: Participants gave 1-5 reasons for participation (mean = 1.7, SD = 0.7). Altruism (48.3%), ASD research interest (47.4%) and perceived personal benefit (26.9%) were most common. Two novel reasons were knowing someone outside the household with the study conditions (peripheral relationship; 14.1%) and desire to contribute to a specified result (1.4%). Odds of reporting interest in ASD research were higher among diagnosed ASD participants (odds ratio [OR] 2.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.49-3.35). Perceived personal benefit had higher odds among diagnosed (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.61-2.29) or suspected ASD (OR 3.67, 95% CI 2.99-4.50) and non-ASD DD (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.50-2.16) participants. Peripheral relationship with ASD/DD had lower odds among all case groups.
CONCLUSIONS: We identified meaningful differences between groups in parent-reported reasons for participation. Differences demonstrate an opportunity for future studies to tailor recruitment materials and increase the perceived benefit for specific prospective participants.