Jennifer B. McCormick

Jennifer B. McCormick


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

18Years (2009-Present)

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

Representative Publications

View All Publications
23 July 2013 in BMC Medical Ethics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ANAdam Nishimura
Adam Nishimura
JCJantey Carey
Jantey Carey
PEPatricia J Erwin
Patricia J Erwin
JTJon C Tilburt
Jon C Tilburt
MMM Hassan Murad
M Hassan Murad
JMJennifer B. McCormick
Jennifer B. McCormick
Background: Obtaining informed consent is a cornerstone of biomedical research, yet participants comprehension of presented information is often low. The most effective interventions to improve understanding rates have not been identified. Purpose: To systematically analyze the random controlled trials testing interventions to research informed consent process. The primary outcome of interest was quantitative rates of participant understanding; secondary outcomes were rates of information retention, satisfaction, and accrual. Interventional categories included multimedia, enhanced consent documents, extended discussions, test/feedback quizzes, and miscellaneous methods. Methods: The search spanned from database inception through September 2010. It was run on Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid CINAHL, Ovid PsycInfo and Cochrane CENTRAL, ISI Web of Science and Scopus. Five reviewers working independently and in duplicate screened full abstract text to determine eligibility. We included only RCTs. 39 out of 1523 articles fulfilled review criteria (2.6%), with a total of 54 interventions. A data extraction form was created in Distiller, an online reference management system, through an iterative process. One author collected data on study design, population, demographics, intervention, and analytical technique. Results: Meta-analysis was possible on 22 interventions: multimedia, enhanced form, and extended discussion categories; all 54 interventions were assessed by review. Meta-analysis of multimedia approaches was associated with a non-significant increase in understanding scores (SMD 0.30, 95% CI, -0.23 to 0.84); enhanced consent form, with significant increase (SMD 1.73, 95% CI, 0.99 to 2.47); and extended discussion, with significant increase (SMD 0.53, 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.84). By review, 31% of multimedia interventions showed significant improvement in understanding; 41% for enhanced consent form; 50% for extended discussion; 33% for test/feedback; and 29% for miscellaneous.Multiple sources of variation existed between included studies: control processes, the presence of a human proctor, real vs. simulated protocol, and assessment formats. Conclusions: Enhanced consent forms and extended discussions were most effective in improving participant understanding. Interventions of all categories had no negative impact on participant satisfaction or study accrual. Identification of best practices for studies of informed consent interventions would aid future systematic comparisons.

2 December 2009 in Nature Reviews Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JIJudy Illes
Judy Illes
MMMary Anne Moser
Mary Anne Moser
JMJennifer B. McCormick
Jennifer B. McCormick
EREric Racine
Eric Racine
SBSandra Blakeslee
Sandra Blakeslee
SWSamuel Weiss
Samuel Weiss

7 October 2014 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AFAlexander S Fiksdal
Alexander S Fiksdal
AKAshok Kumbamu
Ashok Kumbamu
AJAshutosh S Jadhav
Ashutosh S Jadhav
CCCristian Cocos
Cristian Cocos
LNLaurie A Nelsen
Laurie A Nelsen
JMJennifer B. McCormick
Jennifer B. McCormick
Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet

1 March 2015 in Applied & Translational Genomics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
KCKristin Clift
Kristin Clift
CHColin M.E. Halverson
Colin M.E. Halverson
AFAlexander S. Fiksdal
Alexander S. Fiksdal
AKAshok Kumbamu
Ashok Kumbamu
RSRichard R. Sharp
Richard R. Sharp
JMJennifer B. McCormick
Jennifer B. McCormick
This article characterizes the opinions of patients and family members of patients undergoing clinical genomic-based testing regarding the return of incidental findings from these tests. Over sixteen months, we conducted 55 in-depth interviews with individuals to explore their preferences regarding which types of results they would like returned to them. Responses indicate a diversity of attitudes toward the return of incidental findings and a diversity of justifications for those attitudes. The majority of participants also described an imperative to include the patient in deciding which results to return rather than having universal, predetermined rules governing results disclosure. The results demonstrate the importance of a patient centered-approach to returning incidental findings.

8 March 2012 in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JMJennifer B. McCormick
Jennifer B. McCormick
RHRachel R Hammer
Rachel R Hammer
RFRuth Farrell
Ruth Farrell
GGGail Geller
Gail Geller
KJKatherine M James
Katherine M James
RSRichard R Sharp
Richard R Sharp
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are chronic conditions affecting millions of individuals in the United States. The symptoms are well-documented and can be debilitating. How these chronic gastrointestinal (GI) conditions impact the daily lives of those afflicted is not well documented, especially from a patient's perspective.

9 February 2016 in Journal of Community Genetics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CHColin Me Halverson
Colin Me Halverson
KCKristin Clift
Kristin Clift
JMJennifer B. McCormick
Jennifer B. McCormick