Erin Rothwell

Dr. Erin Rothwell


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

19Years (2008-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 March 2018 in Patient Education and Counseling
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MLMichelle L. Litchman
Michelle L. Litchman
ERErin Rothwell
Erin Rothwell
LELinda S. Edelman
Linda S. Edelman

15 June 2015 in Qualitative Health Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ERErin Rothwell
Erin Rothwell
RARebecca Anderson
Rebecca Anderson
JBJeffrey R. Botkin
Jeffrey R. Botkin
This article discusses a new approach for the conduct of focus groups in health research. Identifying ways to educate and inform participants about the topic of interest prior to the focus group discussion can promote more quality data from informed opinions. Data on this deliberative discussion approach are provided from research within three federally funded studies. As healthcare continues to improve from scientific and technological advancements, educating the research participants prior to data collection about these complexities is essential to gather quality data.

2 October 2014 in Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ERErin Rothwell
Erin Rothwell
BWBob Wong
Bob Wong
NRNancy C. Rose
Nancy C. Rose
RARebecca Anderson
Rebecca Anderson
BFBeth Fedor
Beth Fedor
JBJeffrey R. Botkin
Jeffrey R. Botkin
A pilot study assessed an electronic informed consent model within a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Participants who were recruited for the parent RCT project were randomly selected and randomized to either an electronic consent group (n = 32) or a simplified paper-based consent group (n = 30). Results from the electronic consent group reported significantly higher understanding of the purpose of the study, alternatives to participation, and who to contact if they had questions or concerns about the study. However, participants in the paper-based control group reported higher mean scores on some survey items. This research suggests that an electronic informed consent presentation may improve participant understanding for some aspects of a research study.

29 October 2016 in Journal of Genetic Counseling
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ERErin Rothwell
Erin Rothwell
EJErin Johnson
Erin Johnson
AMAmber Mathiesen
Amber Mathiesen
KGKylie Golden
Kylie Golden
AMAudrey Metcalf
Audrey Metcalf
JBJeffrey R. Botkin
Jeffrey R. Botkin
The offering and acceptance of expanded carrier screening is increasing among pregnant women including women without an increased risk based on race, ethnicity or family history. The chances of a positive screening test have been reported to be as high as 24 % when multiple conditions are screened. Yet, little is known about the way these tests are offered and how patients are affected by a positive test result. To explore this area of genetic testing, interviews (n = 17) were conducted among women who received positive expanded carrier results in the context of obstetric care. A content analysis was conducted on the transcript data from the interviews. Outcomes of this research suggest that educational interventions are needed to improve maternal understanding of positive carrier screening results. Most of the participants in this study confused the results with other prenatal screening test options. In addition, the way the results were discussed varied greatly, and influenced participants’ thoughts about reproductive decisions that led to a range of emotional uncertainty. Our data suggests that genetic counseling improved participants’ understanding of positive results. More research is needed to further understand if our results are consistent within a larger, more diverse sample, and to explore how to best provide education about expanded carrier screening.

1 February 2016 in Current Genetic Medicine Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JBJeffrey R. Botkin
Jeffrey R. Botkin
ERErin Rothwell
Erin Rothwell

7 April 2021 in Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ERErin Rothwell
Erin Rothwell
DBDonna Brassil
Donna Brassil
MBMarietta Barton-Baxter
Marietta Barton-Baxter
KBKimberly A. Brownley
Kimberly A. Brownley
NDNeal W. Dickert
Neal W. Dickert
BWBenjamin S. Wilfond
Benjamin S. Wilfond
In this paper, we address how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted informed consent for clinical research through examining experiences within Clinical and Translation Science Award (CTSA) institutions. We begin with a brief overview of informed consent and the challenges that existed prior to COVID-19. Then, we discuss how informed consent processes were modified or changed to address the pandemic, consider what lessons were learned, and present research and policy steps to prepare for future research and public health crises. The experiences and challenges for CTSA institutions offer an important perspective for examining what we have learned about informed consent and determining the next steps for improving the consent process.