Trial reportBMJ open2016
Exploring the experiences of substitute decision-makers with an exception to consent in a paediatric resuscitation randomised controlled trial: study protocol for a qualitative research study.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01973907 (Pilot Study for the SQUEEZE Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Pilot Study for the SQUEEZE Trial: a Trial to Determine Whether Septic Shock Reversal is Quicker in Pediatric Patients Randomized to an Early Goal Directed Fluid-sparing Strategy vs. Usual Care (SQUEEZE)
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- The SQUEEZE pilot trial: a trial to determine whether septic shock reversal is quicker in pediatric patients randomized to an early goal directed fluid-sparing strategy vs. usual care.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Article
- Emergency research without prior consent in the United States, Canada, European Union and United Kingdom: How regulatory differences affect study design and implementation in cardiac arrest trials.Resuscitation plus · 2024Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionProspective informed consent is required for most research involving human participants; however, this is impracticable under some circumstances. The Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS) outlines the requirements for research involving human participants in Canada. The need for an exception to consent (deferred consent) is recognised and endorsed in the TCPS for research in individual medical emergencies; however, little is known about substitute decision-maker (SDM) experiences. A paediatric resuscitation trial (SQUEEZE) (NCT01973907) using an exception to consent process began enrolling at McMaster Children's Hospital in January 2014. This qualitative research study aims to generate new knowledge on SDM experiences with the exception to consent process as implemented in a randomised controlled trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The SDMs of children enrolled into the SQUEEZE pilot trial will be the sampling frame from which ethics study participants will be derived.
designQualitative research study involving individual interviews and grounded theory methodology.
participantsSDMs for children enrolled into the SQUEEZE pilot trial. SAMPLE SIZE: Up to 25 SDMs. Qualitative methodology: SDMs will be invited to participate in the qualitative ethics study. Interviews with consenting SDMs will be conducted in person or by telephone, taped and professionally transcribed. Participants will be encouraged to elaborate on their experience of being asked to consent after the fact and how this process occurred. ANALYSIS: Data gathering and analysis will be undertaken simultaneously. The investigators will collaborate in developing the coding scheme, and data will be coded using NVivo. Emerging themes will be identified. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This research represents a rare opportunity to interview parents/guardians of critically ill children enrolled into a resuscitation trial without their knowledge or prior consent. Findings will inform implementation of the exception to consent process in the planned definitive SQUEEZE trial and support development of evidence-based ethics guidelines.
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.