Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32364468›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2020

Partnering With Patients to Bridge Gaps in Consent for Acute Care Research.

Neal W Dickert, Amanda Michelle Bernard, JoAnne M Brabson, Rodney J Hunter, Regina McLemore, Andrea R Mitchell, Stephen Palmer, Barbara Reed, Michele Riedford, Raymond T Simpson and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Experiences and preferences for learning about neonatal research: insights from parent interviews.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Consent for Acute Care Research and the Regulatory "Gray Zone".The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Neal W DickertEmory University School of Medicine.
Amanda Michelle BernardEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
JoAnne M BrabsonEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
Rodney J HunterEmory University.
Regina McLemoreEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
Andrea R MitchellEmory University School of Medicine.
Stephen PalmerEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
Barbara ReedEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
Michele RiedfordEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
Raymond T SimpsonEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
Candace D SpeightEmory University School of Medicine.
Tracie SteadmanEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
Rebecca D PentzEmory University Winship Cancer Institute.
Emory University · USCancer Institute (WIA) · INWinship Cancer Institute

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical trials for acute conditions such as myocardial infarction and stroke pose challenges related to informed consent due to time limitations, stress, and severe illness. Consent processes should be sensitive to the context in which trials are conducted and to needs of patients and surrogate decision-makers. This manuscript describes a collaborative effort between ethicists, researchers, patients, and surrogates to develop patient-driven, patient-centered approaches to consent for clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction and stroke.Our group identified important ways in which existing consent processes and forms for clinical trials fail to meet patients' and surrogates' needs in the acute context. We collaborated to create model forms and consent processes that are substantially shorter and, hopefully, better-matched to patients' and surrogates' needs and expectations from the perspective of content, structure, and tone. These changes, however, challenge some common conventions regarding consent.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseAdvisory CommitteesConsent FormsResearch SubjectsAdultAgedClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansInformed ConsentMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionStrokeacute careInformed consentmyocardial infarctionpatient-centered careresearch ethicsstroke

Identifiers

PMID32364468
OpenAlexW3021636631

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.