Cited by 47Ethics in Clinical ResearchHealth Policy Implementation ScienceMental Health and Patient Involvement

What, how, when and who of trial results summaries for trial participants: stakeholder-informed guidance from the RECAP project

Open access
Bruhn, Hanne, Campbell, Marion, Entwistle, Vikki, Humphreys, Rosemary, Jayacodi, Sandra, Knapp, Peter, Tizzard, Juliet, Gillies, Katie·2022·BMJ Open

Abstract

Objective: To generate stakeholder informed evidence to support recommendations for trialists to implement the dissemination of results summaries to participants. Design: A multiphase mixed-methods triangulation design involving Q-methodology, content analysis, focus groups and a coproduction workshop (the REporting Clinical trial results Appropriately to Participants project). Setting: Phase III effectiveness trials. Participants: A range of participants were included from ongoing and recently completed trials, public contributors, trialists, sponsors, research funders, regulators, ethics committee members. Results: Fewer than half of the existing trial result summaries contained information on the clinical implications of the study results, an item deemed to be of high importance to participants in the Q-methodology study. Priority of inclusion of a thank you message varied depending on whether considering results for individuals or populations. The need for personally responsive modes of sharing trial result summaries was highlighted as important. Ideally, participants should be the first to know of the results with regard to the timing of sharing results summaries but given this can be challenging it is therefore important to manage expectations. In addition to patients, it was identified that it is important to engage with a range of stakeholders when developing trial results summaries. Conclusions: Results summaries for trial participants should cover four core questions: (1) What question the trial set out to answer?; (2) What did the trial find?; (3) What effect have the trial results had and how will they change National Health Service/treatment?; and (4) How can I find out more? Trial teams should develop appropriately resourced plans and consult patient partners and trial participants on how ‘best’ to share key messages with regard to content, mode, and timing. The study findings provide trial teams with clear guidance on the core considerations of the ‘what, how, when and who’ with regard to sharing results summaries.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057019

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [9]Bruhn H, Cowan E-J, Campbell MK, et al. Providing trial results to participants in phase III pragmatic effectiveness RCTs: a scoping review. Trials 2021; 22: 361. 10.1186/s13063-021-05300-x 34030707 PMC8147098 · DOI
  2. [19]Getz K, Oullette E, Simmons D. Providing results to volunteers. Appl Clin Trials 2010; 19: 52.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bruhn, H., Campbell, M., Entwistle, V., Humphreys, R., Jayacodi, S., Knapp, P., Tizzard, J., & Gillies, K.
Affiliations
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
  • University of York (GB)
  • Health Research Authority (GB)
Corresponding author
Gillies, Katie
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2022-03
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
e057019
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4221044838
Cited by
47
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
FWCI
9.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Medical Research Council (MR/L01193X/1)
  • Academy of Medical Sciences (SBF002\1014)
  • Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government (CZU/3/3)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
Keywords
participant communication, research dissemination, stakeholder engagement, patient and public involvement, Q methodology
MeSH terms
Humans, Referral and Consultation, Research Design, State Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review