Applied Psychology, School of Social Sciences, Technological University of the Shannon, Athlone, Ireland.
School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021 Nov 27;21(1):264. doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01464-x.
Eligibility guidelines in research trials are necessary to minimise confounds and reduce bias in the interpretation of potential treatment effects. There is limited extant research investigating how being deemed ineligible for such trials might impact patients' perceptions of themselves and of research. Better understanding of the impact of patient ineligibility could enhance design and implementation of future research studies.
Eight semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted to explore the impact of ineligibility on self-perceptions; perceptions regarding the nature of research; and the likelihood of expressing interest in future research. Data were collected and analysed thematically through inductive, interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA).
Five themes emerged regarding the experience of being deemed ineligible: (1) Being deemed ineligible is emotion and reaction evoking; (2) 'Doing your bit': Helping others and increasing the value of research; (3) Communication of ineligibility; (4) Appreciation for those who express interest; and (5) Subsequent perceptions and attitudes towards research.
The results suggest that being deemed ineligible can elicit negative emotional outcomes but is not likely to change perceptions of or attitudes towards research, possibly due to a desire to help similar others. Ineligibility can impact future participation in some cases, thus reducing the recruitment pool for subsequent research studies. Recommendations are provided to help minimise this risk. Advising of ineligibility in a personal way is recommended: with enhanced clarity regarding the reasoning behind the decision; providing opportunities to ask questions; and ensuring that appreciation for the patient's time and interest are communicated.
研究试验的入选标准对于最小化混杂因素和减少对潜在治疗效果的偏倚至关重要。目前关于被认为不符合这些试验入选标准如何影响患者对自身和研究的看法的研究有限。更好地了解患者不合格的影响可以增强未来研究的设计和实施。
进行了 8 次半结构式电话访谈,以探讨不合格对自我认知的影响;对研究性质的看法;以及对未来研究表达兴趣的可能性。通过归纳、解释性现象学分析(IPA)对数据进行了主题收集和分析。
有 5 个主题与被认为不合格的经历有关:(1)被认为不合格会引起情绪和反应;(2)“尽自己的一份力”:帮助他人并增加研究的价值;(3)不合格的沟通;(4)对表达兴趣的人的感激;以及(5)随后对研究的看法和态度。
结果表明,被认为不合格会引起负面的情绪反应,但不太可能改变对研究的看法或态度,可能是因为有帮助类似他人的愿望。在某些情况下,不合格可能会影响未来的参与,从而减少后续研究的招募人数。因此,提出了一些建议来尽量减少这种风险。建议以个人化的方式告知不合格:更清楚地说明决策背后的原因;提供提问的机会;并确保对患者的时间和兴趣表示赞赏。