Evidence mapPaperPMID 40038540Full record

ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2025

Piloting the better research interactions for every family (BRIEF) researcher intervention to support recruitment for a neonatal clinical trial: parent experience and infant enrollment.

Elliott Mark Weiss, Devan M Duenas, Andrea Kelsh, Megan M Gray, Ellie Oslin, Devinae Mcneil, Sandra E Juul, Stephanie A Kraft

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. A quality improvement project to optimize the neonatology research experience for families.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Elliott Mark WeissTreuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics and Palliative Care, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA. emweiss@uw.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2473-9638
Devan M DuenasTreuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics and Palliative Care, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA, USA.
Andrea KelshMailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York, Columbia, USA.
Megan M GrayDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3272-9432
Ellie OslinDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Devinae McneilUniversity of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.
Sandra E JuulDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6861-6229
Stephanie A KraftDepartment of Bioethics and Decision Sciences, Geisinger College of Health Sciences, Danville, PA, USA.

Funding

Improving Diversity in Neonatal Clinical Trial EnrollmentK23HD103872 · NICHD · SEATTLE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL · 2023 to 2025
$321k
Respect for Persons in the Genomics Research Enrollment Process: Incorporating Diverse Experiences and AttitudesK01HG010361 · NHGRI · SEATTLE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL · PI Stephanie A Kraft · 2022 to 2023
$259k
NHGRI NIH HHS K01 HG010361NICHD NIH HHS K23 HD103872U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) K23HD103872U.S. Department of Health & Human Services | NIH | National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) K01HG010361
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRecruiting for neonatal clinical trials is difficult for families and participation rates are low. We partnered with the DIVI (Darbepoetin plus slow-release IntraVenous Iron) trial for pilot feasibility evaluation of the BRIEF (Better Research Interactions for Every Family) intervention. STUDY

designPre/post design to compare infant data and parent surveys and interviews before and after the BRIEF intervention as well as comparing DIVI enrolled and DIVI not enrolled.

resultsEnrollment rates and parental experiences were similar in pre- and post-BRIEF eras. Most respondents reported positive interactions with researchers. Parents who declined DIVI reported somewhat  worse experiences compared to those who enrolled. Interview respondents reported widely variable experiences. The narrow enrollment window emerged as particularly important to parents' recruitment experience.

conclusionsThe BRIEF intervention was well received and is ready for larger scale testing to assess its impact on parental experience and enrollment rates. Future work should address short enrollment windows common in neonatal clinical trials.

Indexed as

ParentsPatient SelectionProfessional-Family RelationsAdultErythropoietinFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMalePilot ProjectsErythropoietin

Identifiers

PMID40038540
PMCPMC12752018

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.