Open AccessDevelopment of a Research Participants’ Perception Survey to Improve Clinical Research
Author(s) -
Yessis Jennifer L.,
Kost Rhonda G.,
Lee Laura M.,
Coller Barry S.,
Henderson David K.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
clinical and translational science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.303
H-Index - 44
eISSN - 1752-8062
pISSN - 1752-8054
DOI - 10.1111/j.1752-8062.2012.00443.x
Subject(s) - cronbach's alpha , confidentiality , face validity , research design , internal consistency , psychology , focus group , external validity , medline , reliability (semiconductor) , consistency (knowledge bases) , medicine , applied psychology , clinical research , psychometrics , perception , clinical psychology , social psychology , computer science , statistics , mathematics , computer security , artificial intelligence , law , business , pathology , power (physics) , marketing , quantum mechanics , political science , physics , neuroscience
Clinical research participants’ perceptions regarding their experiences during research protocols provide outcome‐based insights into the effectiveness of efforts to protect rights and safety, and opportunities to enhance participants’ clinical research experiences. Use of validated surveys measuring patient‐centered outcomes is standard in hospitals, yet no instruments exist to assess outcomes of clinical research processes. Methods: We derived survey questions from data obtained from focus groups comprised of research participants and professionals. We assessed the survey for face/content validity, and privacy/confidentiality protections and fielded it to research participants at 15 centers. We conducted analyses of response rates, sample characteristics, and psychometrics, including survey and item completion and analysis, internal consistency, item internal consistency, criterion‐related validity, and item usefulness. Responses were tested for fit into existing patient‐centered dimensions of care and new clinical research dimensions using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Results: Surveys were mailed to 18,890 individuals; 4,961 were returned (29%). Survey completion was 89% overall; completion rates exceeded 90% for 88 of 93 evaluable items. Questions fit into three dimensions of patient‐centered care and two novel clinical research dimensions (Cronbach's alpha for dimensions: 0.69–0.85). Conclusions: The validated survey offers a new method for assessing and improving outcomes of clinical research processes. Clin Trans Sci 2012; Volume 5: 452–460