Abstract
Background Disseminating research findings to study participants is emerging as a critical component of clinical research. There is evidence that dissemination strengthens social relations and understanding between researchers and participants and their communities, and it is increasingly required by funding bodies. However, there is limited funding support for and guidance on the implementation of dissemination of research results to study participants.
Methods and Findings We conducted a systematic review to describe the current global practice of dissemination of aggregate research results to study participants. The databases Medline (OVID), Embase and CINAHL were searched to identify publications published from January 1, 2008, to March 18, 2024. A total of 87 studies met the predefined inclusion criteria: 37 were qualitative, 29 were quantitative, and 21 were mixed-methods studies. Most studies concentrated on dissemination of broad health-related research (n=25; 26%), followed by cancer research (n=17; 20%) and genetics (n=16; 18%).
Most participants expected researchers to share results regardless of study outcomes. Many participants viewed receiving results as essential for fostering trust with researchers, feeling valued for their contributions, and fulfilling ethical obligations. Many researchers saw sharing results as a moral duty, especially when participants had limited access to scientific knowledge. The most common method for disseminating results was mailing lay summaries or result letters to participants. Group presentations and workshops were predominantly used in lower income countries. Identified barriers and enablers to result dissemination included researcher attitudes and communication skills, logistics and resources, institutional guidance, and ethical and cultural considerations. Impact of dissemination on research findings included improving health literacy, increased understanding of research, and trust in research.
Conclusions Result dissemination is emerging as an integral component of modern clinical research practice and appears to translate into a broad range of benefits in most circumstances. The current lack of agreement on what constitutes best practice will need to be addressed. The design of frameworks to guide the conduct of dissemination, which are now in early development, require validation in a range of settings, populations and clinical domains. Further work on approaches to dissemination of research findings in lower-middle income countries is required.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos