Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18826637›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2008

Evaluation of the quality of informed consent in a vaccine field trial in a developing country setting.

Deon Minnies, Tony Hawkridge, Willem Hanekom, Rodney Ehrlich, Leslie London, Greg Hussey

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Quality of Informed Consent in Mammography Screening-The Polish Experience.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Illustrated Permission/Assent Form.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2015
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Deon MinniesSouth African Tuberculosis Vaccine Initiative, Institute of Infectious Diseases and Molecular Medicine & School of Child and Adolescent Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. deon.minnies@uct.ac.za
Tony Hawkridge
Willem Hanekom
Rodney Ehrlich
Leslie London
Greg Hussey
South African Tuberculosis Vaccine Initiative · ZAUniversity of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

Protective immunity induced by newborn BCG vaccinationR01AI065653 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN · PI HANEKOM, WILLEM ALBERT · 2005 to 2009
$2.5M
NIAID NIH HHS N01 AI070022NIAID NIH HHS N01-AI70022NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI065653NIAID NIH HHS R01-AI065653
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformed consent is an ethical and legal requirement for research involving human participants. However, few studies have evaluated the process, particularly in Africa. Participants in a case control study designed to identify correlates of immune protection against tuberculosis (TB) in South Africa. This study was in turn nested in a large TB vaccine efficacy trial. The aim of the study was to evaluate the quality of consent in the case control study, and to identify factors that may influence the quality of consent. Cross-sectional study conducted over a 4 month period.

methodsConsent was obtained from parents of trial participants. These parents were asked to complete a questionnaire that contained questions about the key elements of informed consent (voluntary participation, confidentiality, the main risks and benefits, etc.). The recall (success in selecting the correct answers) and understanding (correctness of interpretation of statements presented) were measured.

resultsThe majority of the 192 subjects interviewed obtained scores greater than 75% for both the recall and understanding sections. The median score for recall was 66%; interquartile range (IQR) = 55%-77% and for understanding 75% (IQR = 50%-87%). Most (79%) were aware of the risks and 64% knew that they participated voluntarily. Participants who had completed Grade 7 at school and higher were more likely (OR = 4.94; 95% CI = 1.57 - 15.55) to obtain scores greater than 75% for recall than those who did not. Participants who were consented by professional nurses who had worked for more than two years in research were also more likely (OR = 2.62; 95% CI = 1.35-5.07) to obtain such scores for recall than those who were not.

conclusionNotwithstanding the constraints in a developing country, in a population with low levels of literacy and education, the quality of informed consent found in this study could be considered as building blocks for establishing acceptable standards for public health research. Education level of respondents and experience of research staff taking the consent were associated with good quality informed consent.

Indexed as

Educational StatusAdolescentAdultCase-Control StudiesComprehensionCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInformed ConsentMaleMental RecallSouth AfricaTuberculosis, PulmonaryYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID18826637
PMCPMC2575196
OpenAlexW2099483525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 OpenQuestion graph.