Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24885380›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2014

Voluntary participation and comprehension of informed consent in a genetic epidemiological study of breast cancer in Nigeria.

Patricia A Marshall, Clement A Adebamowo, Adebowale A Adeyemo, Temidayo O Ogundiran, Teri Strenski, Jie Zhou, Charles N Rotimi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Patricia A MarshallDepartment of Bioethics, School of Medicine, Room TA 227Case Western Reserve University10900 Euclid Avenue Cleveland, Ohio 44106-4976 Cleveland, USA. pam20@case.edu.
Clement A Adebamowo
Adebowale A Adeyemo
Temidayo O Ogundiran
Teri Strenski
Jie Zhou
Charles N Rotimi

Funding

Genetic epidemiology of complex diseasesZIAHG200362 · NHGRI · NATIONAL HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI ROTIMI, CHARLES · 2009 to 2025
$54.7M
Training ProgramP50HG003390 · NHGRI · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI WIESNER, GEORGIA L · 2004 to 2013
$8.8M
Understanding Obesity In Relation to the Built EnvironmentP20MD006899 · NIMHD · JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ANTOINE-LAVIGNE, DONNA A · 2012 to 2016
$5.3M
INFORMED CONSENT &CONCEPTS OF RACE IN GENETIC RESEARCHR01HG002207 · NHGRI · LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO · PI MARSHALL, PATRICIA A. · 2000 to 2010
$4.2M
NHGRI NIH HHS 2 R01 HG002207-04NHGRI NIH HHS P50-HG-03390NIMHD NIH HHS P20 MD006899
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies on informed consent to medical research conducted in low or middle-income settings have increased, including empirical investigations of consent to genetic research. We investigated voluntary participation and comprehension of informed consent among women involved in a genetic epidemiological study on breast cancer in an urban setting of Nigeria comparing women in the case and control groups.

methodsSurveys were administered in face-to-face interviews with 215 participants following their enrollment in the genetic study (106 patients, 109 controls). Audio-taped in-depth interviews were conducted with a sub-sample of 17 (8%) women who completed the survey.

resultsThe majority of all participants reported being told that participation in the genetic study was voluntary (97%), that they did not feel pressured to participate in the study (99%), and that they could withdraw from the study (81%). The majority of the breast cancer patients (83%) compared to 58% of women in the control group reported that the study purpose was to learn about the genetic inheritance of breast cancer (OR 3.44; 95% CI =1.66, 7.14, p value = 0.001). Most participants reported being told about study procedures (95%) and study benefits (98%). Sixty-eight percent of the patients, compared to 47% of the control group reported being told about study risks (p-value <0.001). Of the 165 married women, 19% reported asking permission from their husbands to enroll in the breast cancer study; no one sought permission from local elders. In-depth interviews highlight the use of persuasion and negotiation between a wife and her husband regarding study participation.

conclusionsThe global expansion of genetic and genomic research highlights our need to understand informed consent practices for studies in ethnically diverse cultural environments such as Africa. Quantitative and qualitative empirical investigations of the informed consent process for genetic and genomic research will further our knowledge of complex issues associated with communication of information, comprehension, decisional authority and voluntary participation. In the future, the development and testing of innovative strategies to promote voluntary participation and comprehension of the goals of genomic research will contribute to our understanding of strategies that enhance the consent process.

Indexed as

ComprehensionGenetic ResearchInformed ConsentAdultBlack PeopleBreast NeoplasmsFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMolecular EpidemiologyNigeriaPatient SelectionRefusal to ParticipateSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID24885380
PMCPMC4032563

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.