Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24893933›Full record

Trial reportMalaria journal2014

Participants' perceptions and understanding of a malaria clinical trial in Bangladesh.

Debashish Das, Phaik Yeong Cheah, Fateha Akter, Dulal Paul, Akhterul Islam, Abdullah A Sayeed, Rasheda Samad, Ridwanur Rahman, Amir Hossain, Arjen Dondorp and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Malaria journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Principles of research ethics: A research primer for low- and middle-income countries.African journal of emergency medicine : Revue africaine de la medecine d'urgence · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

16 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Debashish Das
Phaik Yeong Cheah
Fateha Akter
Dulal Paul
Akhterul Islam
Abdullah A Sayeed
Rasheda Samad
Ridwanur Rahman
Amir Hossain
Arjen Dondorp
Nicholas P Day
Nicholas J White
Mahtabuddin Hasan
Aniruddha Ghose
Elizabeth A AshleyMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, 420/6 Rajvithi Rd,, Bangkok 10400, Thailand. liz@tropmedres.ac.
Abul Faiz
Chittagong Medical College · BDMahidol University · THMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit · THUniversity of Oxford · GBShaheed Suhrawardy Medical College · BD

Funding

Wellcome Trust 093956
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExisting evidence suggests that there is often limited understanding among participants in clinical trials about the informed consent process, resulting in their providing consent without really understanding the purpose of the study, specific procedures, and their rights. The objective of the study was to determine the subjects' understanding of research, perceptions of voluntariness and motivations for participation in a malaria clinical trial.

methodsIn this study semi-structured interviews of adult clinical trial participants with uncomplicated falciparum malaria were conducted in Ramu Upazila Health Complex, in Bangladesh.

resultsOf 16 participants, the vast majority (81%) were illiterate. All subjects had a 'therapeutic misconception' i.e. the trial was perceived to be conducted primarily for the benefit of individual patients when in fact the main objective was to provide information to inform public health policy. From the patients' perspective, getting well from their illness was their major concern. Poor actual understanding of trial specific procedures was reported despite participants' satisfaction with treatment and nursing care.

conclusionThere is frequently a degree of overlap between research and provision of clinical care in malaria research studies. Patients may be motivated to participate to research without a good understanding of the principal objectives of the study despite a lengthy consent process. The findings suggest that use of a standard consent form following the current ICH-GCP guidelines does not result in achieving fully informed consent and the process should be revised, simplified and adapted to individual trial settings.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicAdolescentAdultBangladeshComprehensionFemaleHumansInformed ConsentInterviews as TopicMalariaMaleMiddle AgedPerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID24893933
PMCPMC4055798
OpenAlexW2133472189

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.