ArticleThe Journal of hand surgery2013
The effect of informed consent on results of a standard upper extremity intake questionnaire.
Article in The Journal of hand surgery, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Defining and evaluating the Hawthorne effect in primary care, a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Pooled it
- A Comparison of PROMIS Physical Function and Pain Interference Scores in Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Research Collection Versus Routine Clinical Collection.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2020Article
- The quality of control groups in nonrandomized studies published in the Journal of Hand Surgery.The Journal of hand surgery · 2015Review
- Performance characteristics of the verbal QuickDASH.The Journal of hand surgery · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe trend toward requiring explicit consent from patients participating in observational research introduces the potential for consent bias, either through selection bias or through the Hawthorne effect. In the Hawthorne effect, patients may alter responses based on awareness of participation in a study, thus potentially limiting its applicability to a generalized orthopedic practice. We hypothesized that study subjects' awareness of participation in an observational study by informed consent would alter responses to a standard upper extremity questionnaire in a statistically and clinically meaningful way compared with patients who filled out the questionnaire as a quality control measure.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed data on 39 patients who underwent isolated carpal tunnel release, who had completed preoperative and postoperative Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Quick DASH) forms without providing consent for study participation. Next, we approached 35 patients scheduled to undergo isolated carpal tunnel release who completed the intake questionnaire on the day of surgery, for consent to participate in the study. After obtaining consent but before surgery, these patients completed a second questionnaire and then completed a postoperative questionnaire at a mean of 8 weeks postoperatively.
resultsThere were no significant differences in age, sex, insurance status, symptom duration, nerve conduction study and electromyography results, or disease severity between groups. We identified no statistically significant difference in preoperative or postoperative Quick DASH score between the retrospective and prospective cohorts (40 ± 23 vs 40 ± 19 preoperatively; 27 ± 25 vs 19 ± 13 postoperatively) or within the prospective cohort before and after obtaining informed consent.
conclusionsInformed consent did not significantly alter patients' responses to the Quick DASH questionnaire. These results suggest that both opt-in and opt-out approaches to observational research in hand surgery provide results that may be applicable to a generalized orthopedic practice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides evidence that will inform the interpretation of observational research findings in hand surgery.
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.