Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
3.
J Health Commun ; 22(5): 373-385, 2017 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28339327

ABSTRACT

Clinical trials are essential for developing new and effective treatments and improving patient quality of life; however, many trials cannot answer their primary research questions because they fall short of their recruitment goals. This article reports the results of formative research conducted in two populations, the public and primary care physicians, to identify messages that may raise awareness and increase interest in clinical trials and be used in a national communication campaign. Results suggested that participants were primarily motivated to participate in clinical trials out of a self-interest to help themselves first. Messages illustrated that current treatments were tested via clinical trials, helped normalize trials as routine practices, and reduced concerns over trying something new first. Participants wanted messages that portray trials as state-of-the-art choices that offer some hope, show people like themselves, and are described in a clear, concise manner with actionable steps for them to take. The study revealed some differences in message salience, with healthy audiences exhibiting lower levels of interest. Our results suggest that targeted messages are needed, and that communication with primary health-care providers is an important and necessary component in raising patient awareness of the importance of clinical trials.


Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic , Health Communication/methods , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Health Promotion/organization & administration , Public Opinion , Adult , Female , Focus Groups , Humans , Male , Patient Participation/psychology , United States
4.
Am J Public Health ; 96(11): 1996-2001, 2006 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17018826

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We consulted with representatives of an urban community in Washington, DC, about the ethics of clinical research involving residents of the community with limited access to health care. METHODS: A semistructured community consultation was conducted with core members of the Health Partnership Program of the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases. Three research case examples were discussed; questions and probes (a predetermined question or series of questions used to further investigate or follow-up a response) guided the discussion. RESULTS: The community representatives who took part in the consultation were supportive of research and appreciated the opportunity to be heard. They noted the importance of respecting the circumstances, values, needs, and welfare of research participants; supported widely representative recruitment strategies; and cited the positive benefits of providing care or treatment to participants. Monitoring participants' welfare and ensuring care at a study's end were emphasized. Trust was a central theme; participants suggested several trust-enhancing strategies, including full disclosure of information and the involvement of advocates, physicians, and trusted church members. CONCLUSIONS: Several important strategies emerged for conducting ethical research in urban communities whose residents have limited access to health care.


Subject(s)
Biomedical Research/ethics , Community Networks/organization & administration , Community Participation , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Medically Uninsured/ethnology , National Institutes of Health (U.S.)/organization & administration , Urban Health , Vulnerable Populations/ethnology , Black or African American , District of Columbia , Health Services Needs and Demand , Hispanic or Latino , Humans , Informed Consent , Organizational Case Studies , Patient Selection/ethics , Social Values , Social Welfare , Trust , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...