ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2014
An audit of the knowledge and attitudes of doctors towards Surgical Informed Consent (SIC).
Article in International journal of health policy and management, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- A perioperative management elective as a transition-to-practice intervention: effects on preparedness, professional identity, and career decision-making.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Consensus regarding transoral robotic surgery (TORS) complications for use in a proposed standardised consent form.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessment of the knowledge, attitude and practices of the informed consent process in oral healthcare among dental students in Makerere University Dental Hospital, Uganda.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Assessing Medical Ethics Knowledge and Practice Among Healthcare Professionals in Al Majma'ah, Saudi Arabia.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Practice and Factors Associated with Informed Consenting Process for Major Surgical Procedures Among Health-Care Workers, South Eastern Ethiopia.International journal of general medicine · 2021Article
- Does written informed consent adequately inform surgical patients? A cross sectional study.BMC medical ethics · 2019Article
- [Teaching medical students informed consent].Der Unfallchirurg · 2018Article
- Current issues in patient safety in surgery: a review.Patient safety in surgery · 2015Review
- Current Practices, Limitations, and Recommendations for Informed Consent Education in Medical Students and Physicians: A Scoping Review.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentReview
- ANAESTHETISTS' ATTITUDES AND PRACTICE OF INFORMED CONSENT IN NIGERIA.Journal of the West African College of SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Surgical Informed Consent (SIC) is a comprehensive process that establishes an information-based agreement between the patient and his doctor to undertake a clearly outlined medical or surgical intervention. It is neither a casual formality nor a casually signed piece of paper. The present study was designed to audit the current knowledge and attitudes of doctors towards SIC at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Pakistan.
methodsThis cross-sectional qualitative investigation was conducted under the auspices of the Department of Medical Education (DME), Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS), Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical University (SZABMU), Islamabad over three months period. A 19-item questionnaire was employed for data collection. The participants were selected at random from the list of the surgeons maintained in the hospital and approached face-to-face with the help of a team of junior doctors detailed for questionnaire distribution among them. The target was to cover over 50% of these doctors by convenience sampling.
resultsOut of 231 respondents, there were 32 seniors while 199 junior doctors, constituting a ratio of 1:6.22. The respondents variably responded to the questions regarding various attributes of the process of SIC. Overall, the junior doctors performed poorer compared to the seniors.
conclusionThe knowledge and attitudes of our doctors particularly the junior ones, towards the SIC are less than ideal. This results in their failure to avail this golden opportunity of doctor-patient communication to guide their patients through a solidly informative and legally valid SIC. They are often unaware of the essential preconditions of the SIC; provide incomplete information to their patients; and quite often do not ensure direct involvement of their patients in the process. Additionally they lack an understanding of using interactive computer-based programs as well as the concept of nocebo effect of informed consent.
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.