Cargando…

Staff and service users’ views on a ‘Consent for Contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Recruitment to mental health research can be challenging. ‘Consent for Contact’ (C4C) is a novel framework which may expedite recruitment and contribute to equitable access to research. This paper discusses stakeholder perspectives on using a C4C model in services for people with psychos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Papoulias, Constantina, Robotham, Dan, Drake, Gareth, Rose, Diana, Wykes, Til
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4296527/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25539869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-014-0377-6
_version_ 1782353001634070528
author Papoulias, Constantina
Robotham, Dan
Drake, Gareth
Rose, Diana
Wykes, Til
author_facet Papoulias, Constantina
Robotham, Dan
Drake, Gareth
Rose, Diana
Wykes, Til
author_sort Papoulias, Constantina
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Recruitment to mental health research can be challenging. ‘Consent for Contact’ (C4C) is a novel framework which may expedite recruitment and contribute to equitable access to research. This paper discusses stakeholder perspectives on using a C4C model in services for people with psychosis. METHOD: This is a cross sectional study investigating the views of service users and staff using qualitative methods. Eight focus groups were recruited: five with service users (n = 26) and three with clinicians (n = 17). Purposive sampling was applied in order to reflect the local population in terms of ethnicity, experience of psychiatric services and attitudes towards research. RESULTS: Staff and service users alike associated the principle of ‘consent for contact’ with greater service user autonomy and favourable conditions for research recruitment. Fears around coercion and inappropriate uses of clinical records were common and most marked in service users identifying as having a negative view to research participation. Staff working in inpatient services reported that consenting for future contact might contribute to paranoid ideation. All groups agreed that implementation should highlight safeguards and the opt-in nature of the register. CONCLUSIONS: Staff and service users responded positively to C4C. Clinicians explaining C4C to service users should allay anxieties around coercion, degree of commitment, and use of records. For some service users, researcher access to records is likely to be the most challenging aspect of the consultation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4296527
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42965272015-01-17 Staff and service users’ views on a ‘Consent for Contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study Papoulias, Constantina Robotham, Dan Drake, Gareth Rose, Diana Wykes, Til BMC Psychiatry Research Article BACKGROUND: Recruitment to mental health research can be challenging. ‘Consent for Contact’ (C4C) is a novel framework which may expedite recruitment and contribute to equitable access to research. This paper discusses stakeholder perspectives on using a C4C model in services for people with psychosis. METHOD: This is a cross sectional study investigating the views of service users and staff using qualitative methods. Eight focus groups were recruited: five with service users (n = 26) and three with clinicians (n = 17). Purposive sampling was applied in order to reflect the local population in terms of ethnicity, experience of psychiatric services and attitudes towards research. RESULTS: Staff and service users alike associated the principle of ‘consent for contact’ with greater service user autonomy and favourable conditions for research recruitment. Fears around coercion and inappropriate uses of clinical records were common and most marked in service users identifying as having a negative view to research participation. Staff working in inpatient services reported that consenting for future contact might contribute to paranoid ideation. All groups agreed that implementation should highlight safeguards and the opt-in nature of the register. CONCLUSIONS: Staff and service users responded positively to C4C. Clinicians explaining C4C to service users should allay anxieties around coercion, degree of commitment, and use of records. For some service users, researcher access to records is likely to be the most challenging aspect of the consultation. BioMed Central 2014-12-24 /pmc/articles/PMC4296527/ /pubmed/25539869 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-014-0377-6 Text en © Papoulias et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2014 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Papoulias, Constantina
Robotham, Dan
Drake, Gareth
Rose, Diana
Wykes, Til
Staff and service users’ views on a ‘Consent for Contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study
title Staff and service users’ views on a ‘Consent for Contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study
title_full Staff and service users’ views on a ‘Consent for Contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study
title_fullStr Staff and service users’ views on a ‘Consent for Contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Staff and service users’ views on a ‘Consent for Contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study
title_short Staff and service users’ views on a ‘Consent for Contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study
title_sort staff and service users’ views on a ‘consent for contact’ research register within psychosis services: a qualitative study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4296527/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25539869
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-014-0377-6
work_keys_str_mv AT papouliasconstantina staffandserviceusersviewsonaconsentforcontactresearchregisterwithinpsychosisservicesaqualitativestudy
AT robothamdan staffandserviceusersviewsonaconsentforcontactresearchregisterwithinpsychosisservicesaqualitativestudy
AT drakegareth staffandserviceusersviewsonaconsentforcontactresearchregisterwithinpsychosisservicesaqualitativestudy
AT rosediana staffandserviceusersviewsonaconsentforcontactresearchregisterwithinpsychosisservicesaqualitativestudy
AT wykestil staffandserviceusersviewsonaconsentforcontactresearchregisterwithinpsychosisservicesaqualitativestudy