ArticlePloS one2013
'The words will pass with the blowing wind': staff and parent views of the deferred consent process, with prior assent, used in an emergency fluids trial in two African hospitals.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Views on consent approaches used in emergency and critical care research: a rapid, systematic review.Trials · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A comprehensive systematic review of stakeholder attitudes to alternatives to prospective informed consent in paediatric acute care research.BMC medical ethics · 2018Pooled it
- Alternative consent processes in a neonatal resuscitation trial (SAIL): secondary analysis of an open-label, international, multicentre, randomised trial.The Lancet. Child & adolescent health · 2025Trial
- Questioning approaches to consent in time critical obstetric trials: findings from a mixed-methods study.BMJ open · 2024Trial
- Stakeholders' perspectives on clinical trial acceptability and approach to consent within a limited timeframe: a mixed methods study.BMJ open · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Routine gastric residual volume measurement to guide enteral feeding in mechanically ventilated infants and children: the GASTRIC feasibility study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- Restricted fluid bolus volume in early septic shock: results of the Fluids in Shock pilot trial.Archives of disease in childhood · 2019Trial
- A qualitative feasibility study to inform a randomised controlled trial of fluid bolus therapy in septic shock.Archives of disease in childhood · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Parent views on a two-step consent process used in emergency neonatal research in the delivery room in Eastern Uganda.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Enhancing communication with bereaved relatives about emergency and critical care trials (ENHANCE): a mixed-methods study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Perceptions of consent for a paediatric telehealth trial during emergency transport in Pakistan.Archives of disease in childhood · 2025Article
- Impact of early continuous positive airway pressure in the delivery room (DR-CPAP) on neonates < 1500 g in a low-resource setting: a protocol for a pilot feasibility and acceptability randomized controlled trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2024Article
- Practical approaches for supporting informed consent in neonatal clinical trials.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2024Review
- A Phase I trial of Non-invasive Ventilation and seizure prophylaxis with levetiracetam In Children with Cerebral Malaria Trial (NOVICE-M Trial).Wellcome open research · 2024Article
- Parental perspectives about information and deferred versus two-stage consent in studies of neonatal asphyxia.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo document and explore the views and experiences of key stakeholders regarding the consent procedures of an emergency research clinical trial examining immediate fluid resuscitation strategies, and to discuss the implications for similar trials in future.
methodsA social science sub-study of the FEAST (Fluid Expansion As Supportive Therapy) trial. Interviews were held with trial team members (n = 30), health workers (n = 15) and parents (n = 51) from two purposively selected hospitals in Soroti, Uganda, and Kilifi, Kenya.
findingsOverall, deferred consent with prior assent was seen by staff and parents as having the potential to protect the interests of both patients and researchers, and to avoid delays in starting treatment. An important challenge is that the validity of verbal assent is undermined when inadequate initial information is poorly understood. This concern needs to be balanced against the possibility that full prior consent on admission potentially causes harm through introducing delays. Full prior consent also potentially imposes worries on parents that clinicians are uncertain about how to proceed and that clinicians want to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the child's outcome (some parents' interpretation of the need for signed consent). Voluntariness is clearly compromised for both verbal assent and full prior consent in a context of such vulnerability and stress. Further challenges in obtaining verbal assent were: what to do in the absence of the household decision-maker (often the father); and how medical staff handle parents not giving a clear agreement or refusal.
conclusionWhile the challenges identified are faced in all research in low-income settings, they are magnified for emergency trials by the urgency of decision making and treatment needs. Consent options will need to be tailored to particular studies and settings, and might best be informed by consultation with staff members and community representatives using a deliberative approach.
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.