Understanding Stakeholder Views on RCTs in Intellectual Disabilities
Author Information
Author(s): Dan Robotham, Michael King, Anton Canagasabey, Sophie Inchley-Mort, Angela Hassiotis
Primary Institution: Mental Health Foundation
Hypothesis
How well do service users, carers, and health professionals understand and accept the need for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in intellectual disabilities research?
Conclusion
Stakeholders generally view the need for RCTs positively, but there are concerns about understanding the design and obtaining informed consent.
Supporting Evidence
- Participants expressed concerns about capacity and resource allocation but held positive views towards RCTs.
- Understanding of RCT principles was poor among service users and some carers.
- Professionals had a better understanding of RCTs due to their training and experience.
- Stakeholders believe that RCTs are important for improving services for individuals with intellectual disabilities.
Takeaway
This study asked people involved in caring for those with intellectual disabilities what they think about research trials, and most think they are important, but many don't understand how they work.
Methodology
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 51 participants, including service users, carers, and professionals, to gather qualitative data on their perceptions of RCTs.
Potential Biases
Potential bias in understanding RCTs due to varying levels of exposure and experience among stakeholders.
Limitations
The study's findings may not be generalizable due to the specific population and the limited number of service users who could be interviewed.
Participant Demographics
Participants included 6 service users, 18 carers (11 paid, 7 family), and 27 health and social care professionals, with a majority being female.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website