ArticleJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine1998
Consent obtained by the junior house officer--is it informed?
Article in Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Canadian Association of Gastroenterology consensus guidelines on safety and quality indicators in endoscopy.Canadian journal of gastroenterology = Journal canadien de gastroenterologie · 2012Guideline
- A randomised trial of conventional versus BAUS procedure-specific consent forms for transurethral resection of prostate.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2009Trial
- Confidence level, challenges, and obstacles faced by orthopedic residents in obtaining informed consent.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Of 30 junior house officers questioned, 21 had obtained patients' consent for colonoscopy. Of these 21, about one-third did not routinely discuss with patients the risks of perforation and haemorrhage. Ideally, consent should be obtained by a person capable of performing the procedure. If it is to be obtained by junior house officers, they need to know exactly what must be disclosed about each procedure. This could easily be done as part of the induction package.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.