ArticlePerspectives in clinical research
Consent for audio-video recording of informed consent process in rural South India.
Article in Perspectives in clinical research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Ethics in Psychiatric Research.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2022Article
- What does it mean to be the main caregiver to a terminally ill family member in Lithuania?: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2022Article
- What empirical research has been undertaken on the ethics of clinical research in India? A systematic scoping review and narrative synthesis.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Contributory factors to the evolution of the concept and practice of informed consent in clinical research: A narrative review.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2020Review
- Reducing research waste by promoting informed responses to invitations to participate in clinical trials.Trials · 2019Article
- "The invisible": Participant's experiences in clinical trials.Perspectives in clinical researchArticle
- Audiovisual recording of the consenting process in clinical research: Experiences from a tertiary referral center.Perspectives in clinical researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
objectivesIn recent times, audio-video (A-V) recording of consent process for all the study subjects entering a clinical trial has been made mandatory. A-V recording of informed consent process is a big challenge due to confidentiality and the sociocultural environment in India. It is important to find out the acceptability for A-V recording of the consent process and reasons for refusal, if any to address this new challenge. MATERIALS AND
methodsA descriptive survey was done among 150 residents of a rural community of South India. Acceptability for A-V recording of consent process was assessed among those who had given the informed written consent for participation in the study. An attempt to find the factors determining the refusal was also made.
resultsMore than one-third (34%) of the study subjects refused to give consent for A-V recording of consent process. Not interested in recording or don't like to be recorded (39%) were the most common reasons to refuse for A-V recording of consent process. The refusal was higher among female and younger age-group adult subjects. Socioeconomic status was not found to be significantly associated with refusal to consent for A-V recording.
conclusionRefusal for A-V recording of consent process is high in the South Indian rural population. Before any major clinical trial, particularly a field trial, an assessment of consent for A-V recording would be helpful in recruitment of study subjects.
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.