Trial reportBMJ open2026
Dissemination of trial results to study participants in Cambodia, Ethiopia and Pakistan: a qualitative study.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04411836 (Effectiveness of Novel Approaches to Radical Cure With Tafenoquine and Primaquine - a Randomized Controlled Trial in P. Vivax Patients), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Effectiveness of Novel Approaches to Radical Cure With Tafenoquine and Primaquine - a Randomized Controlled Trial in P. Vivax Patients
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesDissemination of study results to research participants is an ethical imperative, yet it is rarely implemented in resource-limited settings partly due to a lack of clear guidance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and explore dissemination activities that were conducted as part of a multi-site clinical trial of
designQualitative study using focus group discussions (FGDs) and an inductive-deductive thematic analysis approach.
settingClinical trial study site catchment areas in Cambodia, Ethiopia and Pakistan.
participantsDissemination attendees were invited to participate in FGDs, a subset agreeing and able to participate. There were 25 participants in Cambodia, 34 in Ethiopia and 23 in Pakistan.
resultsThe dissemination activities were well accepted by participants despite some expectations in receiving individual results rather than only aggregated trial results and suggestions for broader community dissemination. Dissemination participants perceived having learnt from the dissemination, demonstrating their knowledge of the trial and its results and attributing it to the dissemination. Dissemination activities may have failed to correct certain misconceptions, including the blurred distinction between clinical care and trial-related care; however, the dissemination had positive impacts, including making participants feel part of a larger endeavour.
conclusionContributing to the limited data on dissemination in resource-limited settings, our findings provide context-informed recommendations that can be applied to similar settings. Our recommendations underscore the importance of tailoring activities according to participant preferences, such as potentially providing individual results and implementing broader community dissemination. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04411836.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.