ArticleAIDS care2014
Theoretical model of critical issues in informed consent in HIV vaccine trials.
Article in AIDS care, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The informed consent process (ICP) for HIV vaccine trials poses unique challenges and would benefit from improvements to its historically based structure and format. Here, we propose a theoretical framework that provides a basis for systematically evaluating and addressing these challenges. The proposed framework follows a linear pathway, starting with the precondition of voluntariness, three main variables of valid decision-making (competency, provision of information and understanding) and then the consequential outcome of either refusal or consent to participate. The existing literature reveals that culturally appropriate provision of information and resultant understanding by the vaccine trial participant are among the most significant factors influencing the authenticity of valid decision-making, though they may be overridden by other considerations, such as individual altruism, mistrust, and HIV-related stigma. Community collaborations to foster bidirectional transmission of information and more culturally tailored consenting materials, therefore, represent a key opportunity to enhance the ICP. By providing a visual synopsis of the issues most critical to IC effectiveness in a categorical and relational manner, the framework provided here presents HIV vaccine researchers a tool by which the ICP can be more systematically evaluated and consequently improved.
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.