Online Research Participant Communication: Balancing Benefits and Risks

Q2 Social Sciences Ethics & human research Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1002/eahr.500094
Luke Gelinas, Walker Morrell, Sarah A. White, Barbara E. Bierer
{"title":"Online Research Participant Communication: Balancing Benefits and Risks","authors":"Luke Gelinas,&nbsp;Walker Morrell,&nbsp;Sarah A. White,&nbsp;Barbara E. Bierer","doi":"10.1002/eahr.500094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Online communication has emerged as an important vehicle for participant interaction during the course of clinical research. At the same time, such communication has been identified as a source of risks both for participants and the scientific integrity of clinical trials. Although strategies for mitigating these risks have become a focus in the research community, missing from the discussion has been a sustained and sympathetic effort to understand the various benefits of online communication for participants themselves. In this article, we provide a taxonomy of the benefits of online communication for participants and argue that attempts to mitigate the risks of online communication by discouraging or placing limits on such communication are generally unadvisable. Instead, we advance a context-sensitive approach that emphasizes education and several actionable recommendations for preserving the benefits of online participant communities while mitigating the risks.</p>","PeriodicalId":36829,"journal":{"name":"Ethics & human research","volume":"43 4","pages":"2-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/eahr.500094","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics & human research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eahr.500094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Online communication has emerged as an important vehicle for participant interaction during the course of clinical research. At the same time, such communication has been identified as a source of risks both for participants and the scientific integrity of clinical trials. Although strategies for mitigating these risks have become a focus in the research community, missing from the discussion has been a sustained and sympathetic effort to understand the various benefits of online communication for participants themselves. In this article, we provide a taxonomy of the benefits of online communication for participants and argue that attempts to mitigate the risks of online communication by discouraging or placing limits on such communication are generally unadvisable. Instead, we advance a context-sensitive approach that emphasizes education and several actionable recommendations for preserving the benefits of online participant communities while mitigating the risks.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在线研究参与者沟通:平衡利益与风险
在线交流已成为临床研究过程中参与者互动的重要工具。与此同时,这种沟通已被确定为参与者和临床试验的科学完整性的风险来源。尽管减轻这些风险的策略已经成为研究界关注的焦点,但是在讨论中缺少了一种持续的、富有同情心的努力,即理解在线交流对参与者自身的各种好处。在本文中,我们为参与者提供了在线交流的好处分类,并认为通过阻止或限制这种交流来减轻在线交流风险的尝试通常是不可取的。相反,我们提出了一种上下文敏感的方法,强调教育和一些可操作的建议,以保留在线参与者社区的利益,同时降低风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics & human research
Ethics & human research Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The Prospect of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Ethics Review Ethical Issues Faced by Data Monitoring Committees: Results from an Exploratory Qualitative Study The Ethical Case for Decentralized Clinical Trials The European Health Data Space as a Case Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1