Practical guide for determining whether healthcare providers are research participants in cluster randomised trials

INTRODUCTION: on the Ethical Design and Conduct of CRTs, the accurate identification of research participants has continued to challenge researchers and research ethics committees. OBJECTIVE: criteria for identifying research participants. We illustrate key lessons with example CRTs. FRAMEWORK: Study procedures should be analysed in relation to the study objective. A study intervention confers research participant status on healthcare providers if the study objective is to evaluate its effect and it is delivered to or targeted at healthcare providers. A data collection procedure confers research participant status on healthcare providers if it informs a study outcome used to achieve the study objective and it involves interactions between researchers and healthcare providers to collect their data, or the collection of healthcare providers' identifiable private information. KEY LESSONS: In CRTs, healthcare providers may be research participants because of study interventions, data collection procedures, or both; conversely, they may simply be research collaborators. Some study interventions confer research participant status on both healthcare providers and patients. Collecting data on healthcare provider behaviour may confer research participant status on healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS: Accurately identifying research participants in CRTs is essential to their ethical conduct. When healthcare providers are research participants, their rights and welfare should be protected in accordance with research ethics guidelines.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMJ Open
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2025-109131
Primary Topic
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Practical guide for determining whether healthcare providers are research participants in cluster randomised trials

Hayden P. Nix, Cory E. Goldstein, Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer
BMJ Open
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
article

Practical guide for determining whether healthcare providers are research participants in cluster randomised trials

Hayden P. Nix, Cory E. Goldstein, Monica Taljaard, Charles Weijer
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: on the Ethical Design and Conduct of CRTs, the accurate identification of research participants has continued to challenge researchers and research ethics committees. OBJECTIVE: criteria for identifying research participants. We illustrate key lessons with example CRTs. FRAMEWORK: Study procedures should be analysed in relation to the study objective. A study intervention confers research participant status on healthcare providers if the study objective is to evaluate its effect and it is delivered to or targeted at healthcare providers. A data collection procedure confers research participant status on healthcare providers if it informs a study outcome used to achieve the study objective and it involves interactions between researchers and healthcare providers to collect their data, or the collection of healthcare providers' identifiable private information. KEY LESSONS: In CRTs, healthcare providers may be research participants because of study interventions, data collection procedures, or both; conversely, they may simply be research collaborators. Some study interventions confer research participant status on both healthcare providers and patients. Collecting data on healthcare provider behaviour may confer research participant status on healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS: Accurately identifying research participants in CRTs is essential to their ethical conduct. When healthcare providers are research participants, their rights and welfare should be protected in accordance with research ethics guidelines.

BMJ OpenVol. 16(4)
Western University (CA), Dalhousie University (CA), University of Ottawa (CA), Ottawa Hospital (CA)
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.