Sandra Garcia-Hernandez
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Sandra Garcia-Hernandez has a total of 19 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Anowara Begum
Department of Microbiology University of Dhaka Dhaka Bangladesh
2 shared publications - Bethany M. Kwan
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, United States
2 shared publications - Carly Ritger
Adult & Child Center for Outcomes Research & Delivery Science, School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States
2 shared publications - Elizabeth B. Claus
Department of Biostatistics, Yale School of Public Health; Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA
2 shared publications - Guy R Lipof
Low Grade Glioma Registry Research Advisory Council, New Haven, CT, United States
2 shared publications - Ifeoma U. Perkins
Center for Bioethics & Humanities, School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
- 21 August 2025
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in Journal of Participatory Medicine
- Vol. 17 (1) , e68852
Engagement Methods in Brain Tumor Genomic Research: Multimethod Comparative Study
Background: Engaging patients, care partners, and others in research planning and conduct is increasingly valued. However, identifying the most effective ways to do so remains a challenge. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate participation and participant experience using 3 engagement methods with the Low-Grade Glioma (LGG) Registry’s Optimizing Engagement in Discovery of Molecular Evolution of Low-Grade Glioma (OPTIMUM) project, part of the National Cancer Institute’s Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing Network. Methods: We evaluated LGG Registry research advisory council (RAC) meetings, Twitter (now known as X), and Facebook discussions across 4 engagement activities with each group. Researchers recorded discussions and performed qualitative content analysis to evaluate differences in the nature of interactions and recommendations for promoting trust and participation in LGG Registry research. Participants completed experience surveys after engagements 1 and 4 (Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool, Research Engagement Survey Tool, Trust in Medical Researchers Scale, and Patient Engagement in Research Scale). Results: RAC engagements involved 25 unique participants representing diverse backgrounds; tweet chats and Facebook discussions had 197 and 133 participants, respectively. Qualitative findings highlighted differences in the nature of interactions (eg, communication styles and types of information shared) across groups, but there was general agreement around recommendations for promoting participation in genomic research. Postengagement surveys (n=52 in ipostengagement activity 1; n=40 in postengagement activity 4) showed patterns suggesting a more positive experience overall for the RAC. Conclusions: Advisory councils and social media engagement methods have advantages and disadvantages. Advisory councils provide consistent interactions with the same individuals and clear procedures. Despite theoretically broader reach, social media engagement may yield less diverse perspectives. The LGG Registry aims to use RAC and social media engagement methods to promote diverse perspectives and maintain consistent interactions.
- 21 August 2025
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in Journal of Participatory Medicine
- Vol. 17 (1) , e68852
Open AccessEngagement Methods in Brain Tumor Genomic Research: Multimethod Comparative Study
Background: Engaging patients, care partners, and others in research planning and conduct is increasingly valued. However, identifying the most effective ways to do so remains a challenge. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate participation and participant experience using 3 engagement methods with the Low-Grade Glioma (LGG) Registry’s Optimizing Engagement in Discovery of Molecular Evolution of Low-Grade Glioma (OPTIMUM) project, part of the National Cancer Institute’s Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing Network. Methods: We evaluated LGG Registry research advisory council (RAC) meetings, Twitter (now known as X), and Facebook discussions across 4 engagement activities with each group. Researchers recorded discussions and performed qualitative content analysis to evaluate differences in the nature of interactions and recommendations for promoting trust and participation in LGG Registry research. Participants completed experience surveys after engagements 1 and 4 (Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool, Research Engagement Survey Tool, Trust in Medical Researchers Scale, and Patient Engagement in Research Scale). Results: RAC engagements involved 25 unique participants representing diverse backgrounds; tweet chats and Facebook discussions had 197 and 133 participants, respectively. Qualitative findings highlighted differences in the nature of interactions (eg, communication styles and types of information shared) across groups, but there was general agreement around recommendations for promoting participation in genomic research. Postengagement surveys (n=52 in ipostengagement activity 1; n=40 in postengagement activity 4) showed patterns suggesting a more positive experience overall for the RAC. Conclusions: Advisory councils and social media engagement methods have advantages and disadvantages. Advisory councils provide consistent interactions with the same individuals and clear procedures. Despite theoretically broader reach, social media engagement may yield less diverse perspectives. The LGG Registry aims to use RAC and social media engagement methods to promote diverse perspectives and maintain consistent interactions.
- Open Access
- 15 November 2024
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in JMIR Preprints
Engagement Methods in Brain Tumor Genomic Research: Multimethod Comparative Study (Preprint)
BACKGROUND Engaging patients, care partners, and others in research planning and conduct is increasingly valued. However, identifying the most effective ways to do so remains a challenge. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate participation and participant experience using 3 engagement methods with the Low-Grade Glioma (LGG) Registry’s Optimizing Engagement in Discovery of Molecular Evolution of Low-Grade Glioma (OPTIMUM) project, part of the National Cancer Institute’s Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing Network. METHODS We evaluated LGG Registry research advisory council (RAC) meetings, Twitter (now known as X), and Facebook discussions across 4 engagement activities with each group. Researchers recorded discussions and performed qualitative content analysis to evaluate differences in the nature of interactions and recommendations for promoting trust and participation in LGG Registry research. Participants completed experience surveys after engagements 1 and 4 (Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool, Research Engagement Survey Tool, Trust in Medical Researchers Scale, and Patient Engagement in Research Scale). RESULTS RAC engagements involved 25 unique participants representing diverse backgrounds; tweet chats and Facebook discussions had 197 and 133 participants, respectively. Qualitative findings highlighted differences in the nature of interactions (eg, communication styles and types of information shared) across groups, but there was general agreement around recommendations for promoting participation in genomic research. Postengagement surveys (n=52 in ipostengagement activity 1; n=40 in postengagement activity 4) showed patterns suggesting a more positive experience overall for the RAC. CONCLUSIONS Advisory councils and social media engagement methods have advantages and disadvantages. Advisory councils provide consistent interactions with the same individuals and clear procedures. Despite theoretically broader reach, social media engagement may yield less diverse perspectives. The LGG Registry aims to use RAC and social media engagement methods to promote diverse perspectives and maintain consistent interactions.
- 15 November 2024
- Published by JMIR Publications Inc. in JMIR Preprints
Open AccessEngagement Methods in Brain Tumor Genomic Research: Multimethod Comparative Study (Preprint)
BACKGROUND Engaging patients, care partners, and others in research planning and conduct is increasingly valued. However, identifying the most effective ways to do so remains a challenge. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate participation and participant experience using 3 engagement methods with the Low-Grade Glioma (LGG) Registry’s Optimizing Engagement in Discovery of Molecular Evolution of Low-Grade Glioma (OPTIMUM) project, part of the National Cancer Institute’s Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing Network. METHODS We evaluated LGG Registry research advisory council (RAC) meetings, Twitter (now known as X), and Facebook discussions across 4 engagement activities with each group. Researchers recorded discussions and performed qualitative content analysis to evaluate differences in the nature of interactions and recommendations for promoting trust and participation in LGG Registry research. Participants completed experience surveys after engagements 1 and 4 (Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool, Research Engagement Survey Tool, Trust in Medical Researchers Scale, and Patient Engagement in Research Scale). RESULTS RAC engagements involved 25 unique participants representing diverse backgrounds; tweet chats and Facebook discussions had 197 and 133 participants, respectively. Qualitative findings highlighted differences in the nature of interactions (eg, communication styles and types of information shared) across groups, but there was general agreement around recommendations for promoting participation in genomic research. Postengagement surveys (n=52 in ipostengagement activity 1; n=40 in postengagement activity 4) showed patterns suggesting a more positive experience overall for the RAC. CONCLUSIONS Advisory councils and social media engagement methods have advantages and disadvantages. Advisory councils provide consistent interactions with the same individuals and clear procedures. Despite theoretically broader reach, social media engagement may yield less diverse perspectives. The LGG Registry aims to use RAC and social media engagement methods to promote diverse perspectives and maintain consistent interactions.