Dataset Information

Participant experiences in a breastmilk biomonitoring study: a qualitative assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Biomonitoring studies can provide information about individual and population-wide exposure. However they must be designed in a way that protects the rights and welfare of participants. This descriptive qualitative study was conducted as a follow-up to a breastmilk biomonitoring study. The primary objectives were to assess participants' experiences in the study, including the report-back of individual body burden results, and to determine if participation in the study negatively affected breastfeeding rates or duration.

Methods

Participants of the Greater Boston PBDE Breastmilk Biomonitoring Study were contacted and asked about their experiences in the study: the impact of study recruitment materials on attitudes towards breastfeeding; if participants had wanted individual biomonitoring results; if the protocol by which individual results were distributed met participants' needs; and the impact of individual results on attitudes towards breastfeeding.

Results

No participants reported reducing the duration of breastfeeding because of the biomonitoring study, but some responses suggested that breastmilk biomonitoring studies have the potential to raise anxieties about breastfeeding. Almost all participants wished to obtain individual results. Although several reported some concern about individual body burden, none reported reducing the duration of breastfeeding because of biomonitoring results. The study literature and report-back method were found to mitigate potential negative impacts.

Conclusion

Biomonitoring study design, including clear communication about the benefits of breastfeeding and the manner in which individual results are distributed, can prevent negative impacts of biomonitoring on breastfeeding. Adoption of more specific standards for biomonitoring studies and continued study of risk communication issues related to biomonitoring will help protect participants from harm.

SUBMITTER: Wu N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2649062 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Participant experiences in a breastmilk biomonitoring study: a qualitative assessment.

Wu Nerissa N McClean Michael D MD Brown Phil P Aschengrau Ann A Webster Thomas F TF

Environmental health : a global access science source 20090218

<h4>Background</h4>Biomonitoring studies can provide information about individual and population-wide exposure. However they must be designed in a way that protects the rights and welfare of participants. This descriptive qualitative study was conducted as a follow-up to a breastmilk biomonitoring study. The primary objectives were to assess participants' experiences in the study, including the report-back of individual body burden results, and to determine if participation in the study negative ...[more]

PMID: 19226469

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundResidential weight-loss programs aim to help persons with obesity lose weight and maintain a long-term healthy lifestyle. Knowledge is needed on the different actors' perceptions and experiences from such programs. The aim of this study was to describe how personnel argued for and perceived a residential weight-loss program, to investigate how the participants experienced the program, and to contrast these perspectives.MethodsThis qualitative study took place in an 18-week residential weight-loss program. Exercise, diet, and personal development were the main components in the program. Data was collected through participant observation and individual and focus group interviews with participants and personnel.ResultsProgram personnel characterized persons with obesity in specific terms, and these formed the basis of the educational aims, teaching principles, and content of the program. According to personnel, persons with obesity typically had problems acknowledging their own resources, lived unstructured lives, had a distorted relationship to food, experienced a range of social problems and featured a lack of personal insight. Program participants reported enthusiasm about their experiences of exercise and appreciated measures of success with the exercise program. They had, however, very different experiences regarding the usefulness and appropriateness of the parts of the program focused on social and personal development. Some felt that weight loss required an engagement with personal development while others viewed it as unnecessary and inappropriate.ConclusionThe reliance in personnel accounts on particular characteristics of persons with obesity as a rationale for the program might lead to stigmatizing and stereotyping. Program activities focused on social and personal development need to be better understood by participants if they are to be viewed as helpful. To achieve this personnel must carefully consider how these parts of the program are communicated and conducted.

Project description:The sequence of events in a behaviour change trial involves interactions between research participants and the trial process. Taking part in such a study has the potential to influence the behaviour of the participant, and if it does, this can engender bias in trial outcomes. Since participants' experience has received scant attention, the aim of this study is thus to generate hypotheses about which aspects of the conduct of behaviour change trials might matter most to participants, and thus have potential to alter subsequent behaviours and bias trial outcomesTwenty participants were opportunistically screened for a health compromising behaviour (unhealthy diet, lack of exercise, smoking or alcohol consumption) and recruited if eligible. Semi structured face to face interviews were conducted, after going through the usual processes involved in trial recruitment, baseline assessment and randomisation. Participants were given information on the contents of an intervention or control condition in a behaviour change trial, which was not actually implemented. Three months later they returned to reflect on these experiences and whether they had any effect on their behaviour during the intervening period. Data from the latter interview were analysed thematically using a modified grounded theory approach.The early processes of trial participation raised awareness of unhealthy behaviours, although most reported having had only fleeting intentions to change their behaviour as a result of taking part in this study, in the absence of interventions. However, careful examination of the accounts revealed evidence of subtle research participation effects, which varied according to the health behaviour, and its perceived social acceptability. Participants' relationships with the research study were viewed as somewhat important in stimulating thinking about whether and how to make lifestyle changes.These participants described no dramatic impacts attributable to taking part in this study. This study demonstrates the likely value of well conducted qualitative studies of subtle research participation effects, which may be particularly important to explore for alcohol. Separating unintended influences in trial participation from the effects of behaviour change interventions being evaluated therein is necessary for valid estimates of intervention effects.

Project description:Background:By participating in priority-setting activities in research, patients and members of the public help ensure that important questions are incorporated into future research agendas. Surveys, focus groups, and online crowdsourcing are increasingly used to obtain input, yet little is known about how they compare for prioritizing research topics. To address this gap, the Study of Methods for Assessing Research Topic Elicitation and pRioritization (SMARTER) evaluated participant satisfaction with the engagement experience across three prioritization activities. Methods:Respondents from Back pain Outcomes using Longitudinal Data (BOLD), a registry of patients 65?years and older with low back pain (LBP), were randomly assigned to one of three interactive prioritization activities: online crowd-voting, in-person focus groups using nominal group technique, and two rounds of a mailed survey (Delphi). To assess quality of experience, participants completed a brief survey; a subset were subsequently interviewed. We used descriptive statistics to characterize participants, and we analyzed responses to the evaluation using a mixed-methods approach, tabulating responses to Likert-scale questions and using thematic analysis of interviews to explore participant understanding of the activity and perceptions of experience. Results:The crowd-voting activity had 38 participants, focus groups 39, and the Delphi survey 74. Women outnumbered men in the focus groups and Delphi survey; otherwise, demographics among groups were similar, with participants being predominantly white, non-Hispanic, and college educated. Activities generated similar lists of research priorities, including causes of LBP, improving physician-patient communication, and self-care strategies. The evaluation survey was completed by 123 participants. Of these, 31 across all activities were interviewed about motivations to participate, understanding of activity goals, logistics, clarity of instructions, and the role of patients in research. Focus group participants rated their experience highest, in both the evaluation and interviews. Conclusion:Common methods for research prioritization yielded similar priorities but differing perceptions of experience. Such comparative studies are rare but important in understanding methods to involve patients and the public in research. Preferences for different methods may vary across stakeholder groups; this warrants future study. Trial registration:NICHSR, HSRP20152274. Registered 19 February 2015.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Habit-based weight-loss interventions have shown clinically important weight loss and weight-loss maintenance. Understanding why habit-based interventions work is therefore of great value, but there is little qualitative evidence about the experiences of participants in such programmes. We explored the perspectives of individuals who completed two habit-based weight-management programmes, Ten Top Tips and Do Something Different. DESIGN:One-on-one, face-to-face, semistructured interviews were conducted and analysed thematically. SETTING:Participants from the community were interviewed at Bond University, Australia. PARTICIPANTS:Using a maximum variation design, we recruited 15 participants (eight men, seven women) aged 39-69 years (mean 53.3 years, SD 10.3) with a range of education levels (no high school to university degree) and percentage weight change on the programmes (+4.0% to -10.4%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:(1) The general experience of participants who completed the Ten Top Tips or Do Something Different intervention, (2) whether and how the interventions affected the participants' lifestyle postintervention, and (3) participants' views regarding the acceptability and practical application of Ten Top Tips and Do Something Different. RESULTS:Participants reported positive experiences of the two programmes, both during and after the interventions. Participants particularly enjoyed the novelty of the interventions as they shifted focus from diet and exercise, to practical everyday habit changes. They also reported indirect health benefits such as increased energy levels, increased confidence and improved self-awareness. Accountability throughout the programmes and convenience of the interventions were identified as key themes and facilitators for weight-loss success. CONCLUSIONS:This study offers insight into how and why habit-based interventions might work. Overall, Ten Top Tips and Do Something Different are practical and convenient to implement, and are viewed favourably by participants when compared with conventional lifestyle programmes for weight control. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ACTRN12615000114549.

Project description:ObjectivesClinical guidelines recommend early cognitive assessment after stroke to inform rehabilitation and discharge decisions. However, little is known about stroke survivors' experiences of the cognitive assessment process. This qualitative study aimed to explore patients' experiences of poststroke cognitive assessments.DesignStroke survivors were purposively sampled in an iterative process through a pool of research volunteers who had previously taken part in the Oxford Cognitive Screen Recovery study. Stroke survivors and their family caregivers were invited to participate in a semistructured interview steered by a topic guide. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Demographic, clinical and cognitive data were acquired from patients' previous research data.SettingStroke survivors were originally recruited from the acute inpatient unit at Oxford University Hospital (John Radcliffe), UK. Participants were interviewed after discharge either at their homes or via telephone or videocall.ParticipantsTwenty-six stroke survivors and eleven caregivers participated in semi-structured interviews.ResultsWe identified three key phases of the cognitive assessment process and themes pertaining to each phase. The phases (numbered) and themes (lettered) were as follows: (1) before the cognitive assessment: (A) lack of explanation, (B) considering the assessment useless; (2) during the cognitive assessment: varied emotional responses, moderated by (D) perception of the purpose behind cognitive assessment, (E) perception of cognitive impairment, (F) confidence in cognitive abilities, (G) assessment administration style and (3) after the cognitive assessment: (H) feedback can impact self-confidence and self-efficacy, (I) vague feedback and clinical jargon are unhelpful.ConclusionsStroke survivors require clear explanations about the purpose and outcomes of poststroke cognitive assessments, including constructive feedback, to promote engagement with the process and protect their psychological wellbeing.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals with a positive viral test were enrolled in a study, within 48 hours, to remotely monitor their vital signs to characterize disease progression and recovery. A virtual trial design was adopted to reduce risks to participants and the research community in a study titled Risk Stratification and Early Alerting Regarding COVID-19 Hospitalization (RiskSEARCH). The Food and Drug Administration-cleared Current Health platform with a wearable device is a continuous remote patient monitoring technology that supports hospital-at-home care and is used as a data collection tool. Enrolled participants wore the Current Health wearable device continuously for up to 30 days and took a daily symptom survey via a tablet that was provided. A qualitative substudy was conducted in parallel to better understand virtual trial implementation, including barriers and facilitators for participants.ObjectiveThis study aimed to understand the barriers and facilitators of the user experience of interacting with a virtual care platform and research team, while participating in a fully virtual study using qualitative and quantitative data.MethodsSemistructured interviews were conducted to understand participants' experience of participating in a virtual study during a global pandemic. The schedule included their experience of enrollment and their interactions with equipment and study staff. A total of 3 RiskSEARCH participants were interviewed over telephone, and transcriptions were inductively coded and analyzed using thematic analysis. Themes were mapped onto the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify and describe the factors that influenced study adherence. Quantitative metrics, including adherence to wearable and scheduled tasks collected as part of the RiskSEARCH main study, were paired with the interviews to present an overall picture of participation.ResultsAll participants exceeded our definition of a fully adherent participant and reported that participation was feasible and had a low burden. The symptoms progressively resolved during the trial. Inductive thematic analysis identified 13 main themes from the interview data, which were deductively mapped onto 11 of the 14 TDF domains, highlighting barriers and facilitators for each.ConclusionsParticipants in the RiskSEARCH substudy showed high levels of adherence and engagement throughout participation. Although participants experienced some challenges in setting up and maintaining the Current Health kit (eg, charging devices), they reported feeling that the requirements of participation were both reasonable and realistic. We demonstrated that the TDF can be used for inductive thematic analysis. We anticipate expanding this work in future virtual studies and trials to identify barriers and enabling factors for implementation.

Dataset Information

Participant experiences in a breastmilk biomonitoring study: a qualitative assessment.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Participant experiences in a breastmilk biomonitoring study: a qualitative assessment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets