4.6 Article

Looking back in time: conducting a cohort study of the long-term effects of treatment of adolescent tall girls with synthetic hormones

Journal

BMC PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 11, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-S5-S7

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Health & Medical Research Council [9937231, 433043]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Public health research is an endeavour that often involves multiple relationships, far-reaching collaborations, divergent expectations and various outcomes. Using the Tall Girls Study as a case study, this paper will present and discuss a number of methodological, ethical and legal challenges that have implications for other public health research. Approach: The Tall Girls Study was the first study to examine the long-term health and psychosocial effects of oestrogen treatment for tall stature. Results: In undertaking this study the research team overcame many hurdles: in maintaining collaboration with treating clinicians and with the women they had treated as girls - groups with opposing points of view and different expectations; using private practice medical records to trace women who had been patients up to forty years earlier; and exploring potential legal issues arising from the collection of data related to treatment. Conclusion: While faced with complex challenges, the Tall Girls Study demonstrated that forward planning, ongoing dialogue between all stakeholders, transparency of processes, and the strict adherence to group-developed protocols were keys to maintaining rigour while undertaking pragmatic research. Implications: Public health research often occurs within political and social contexts that need to be considered in the planning and conduct of studies. The quality and acceptability of research findings is enhanced when stakeholders are engaged in all aspects of the research process.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available