Inviting parents to take part in paediatric palliative care research: A mixed-methods examination of selection bias

Palliative Medicine

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 231-240

  Crocker, Joanna C ^a,b   Beecham, Emma ^a,c   Kelly, Paula ^a,d   Dinsdale, Andrew P ^a   Hemsley, June ^a   Jones, Louise ^c   Bluebond Langner, Myra ^a,e  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^e RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

child; paediatrics; Palliative care; patient selection; research design; selection bias

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CHILD; CHILD HEALTH CARE; DATA BASE; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EXPERIENCE; FAMILY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; INFANT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PALLIATIVE THERAPY; PARENTAL ATTITUDE; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SELECTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL BEING; RESEARCH ETHICS; SELECTION BIAS; UNITED KINGDOM; ADULT; ADVANCE CARE PLANNING; CONSUMER; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PARENT; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARDS; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ADVANCE CARE PLANNING; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PALLIATIVE CARE; PARENTS; PATIENT SELECTION; RESEARCH DESIGN; SELECTION BIAS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84923481899     PISSN: 02692163     EISSN: 1477030X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0269216314560803     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Keeley PW. Improving the evidence base in palliative medicine: a moral imperative. J Med Ethics. 2008 ; 34: 757-760
2. Hinds PS, Burghen EA, Pritchard M. Conducting end-of-life studies in pediatric oncology. West J Nurs Res. 2007 ; 29: 448-465
3. Stevens MM, Lord BA, Proctor MT, et al. Research with vulnerable families caring for children with life-limiting conditions. Qual Health Res. 2010 ; 20: 496-505
4. Tomlinson D, Bartels U, Hendershot E, et al. Challenges to participation in paediatric palliative care research: a review of the literature. Palliat Med. 2007 ; 21: 435-440
5. Duke S, Bennett H. A narrative review of the published ethical debates in palliative care research and an assessment of their adequacy to inform research governance. Palliat Med. 2010 ; 24: 111-126
6. Sharkey K, Savulescu J, Aranda S, et al. Clinician gate-keeping in clinical research is not ethically defensible: an analysis. J Med Ethics. 2010 ; 36: 363-366
7. Hudson P, Aranda S, Kristjanson L, et al. Minimising gate-keeping in palliative care research. Eur J Palliat Care. 2005 ; 12: 164-169
8. Knapp CA, Madden VL, Curtis C, et al. Assessing non-response bias in pediatric palliative care research. Palliat Med. 2010 ; 24: 340-347
9. Anonymisation: managing data protection risk code of practice. Wilmslow: Information Commissioner's Office ; 2012 :
10. Amiel P, Moreau D, Vincent-Genod C, et al. Noninvitation of eligible individuals to participate in pediatric studies: a qualitative study. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007 ; 161: 446-450
11. Fletcher B, Gheorghe A, Moore D, et al. Improving the recruitment activity of clinicians in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2012 ; 2: e000496
12. Tan H, Wilson A, Olver I, et al. Recruiting palliative patients for a large qualitative study: some ethical considerations and staff dilemmas. Explore. 2010 ; 6: 159-165
13. Mickey RM, Greenland S. The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiol. 1989 ; 129: 125-137
14. Creswell JW, Clark VLP Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 2 nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2011. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE ; 2011 :
15. Coyne IT. Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling; merging or clear boundaries?. J Adv Nurs. 1997 ; 26: 623-630
16. Jensen P, Catherine, Mays N Quality in qualitative health research. Qualitative research in health care. 3 rd ed.Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2008, p. 90. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley ; 2008: 90.
17. Burgess N, Christensen H, Griffiths KM, et al. Recruitment challenges associated with a randomised controlled trial within a general telephone counselling service. J Telemed Telecare. 2010 ; 16: 409-413
18. Castel P, Negrier S, Boissel JP. Why don't cancer patients enter clinical trials? A review. Eur J Cancer. 2006 ; 42: 1744-1748
19. Prescott RJ, Counsell CE, Gillespie WJ, et al. Factors that limit the quality, number and progress of randomised controlled trials. Health Technol Assess. 1999 ; 3: 1-143
20. Mason V, Shaw A, Wiles N, et al. GPs' experiences of primary care mental health research: a qualitative study of the barriers to recruitment. Fam Pract. 2007 ; 24: 518-525
21. Ewing G, Rogers M, Barclay S, et al. Recruiting patients into a primary care based study of palliative care: why is it so difficult?. Palliat Med. 2004 ; 18: 452-459
22. Shilling V, Williamson PR, Hickey H, et al. Processes in recruitment to randomised controlled trials of medicines for children (RECRUIT): a qualitative study. Health Technol Assess. 2011 ; 15: 1-116
23. Schofield P, Ugalde A, Carey M, et al. Lung cancer: challenges and solutions for supportive care intervention research. Palliat Support Care. 2008 ; 6: 281-287
24. Spaar A, Frey M, Turk A, et al. Recruitment barriers in a randomized controlled trial from the physicians' perspective: a postal survey. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009 ; 9: 14
25. Westcombe AM, Gambles MA, Wilkinson SM, et al. Learning the hard way! Setting up an RCT of aromatherapy massage for patients with advanced cancer. Palliat Med. 2003 ; 17: 300-307
26. White C, Gilshenan K, Hardy J. A survey of the views of palliative care healthcare professionals towards referring cancer patients to participate in randomized controlled trials in palliative care. Support Care Cancer. 2008 ; 16: 1397-1405