Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27733160›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2016

Personalized assent for pediatric biobanks.

Noor A A Giesbertz, Karen Melham, Jane Kaye, Johannes J M van Delden, Annelien L Bredenoord

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

5 authors.

Noor A A GiesbertzDepartment of Medical Humanities, Division Julius Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Office Stratenum 6.131, P.O. Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. n.giesbertz@umcutrecht.nl.
Karen MelhamClinical Trials & Research Governance (CTRG) University of Oxford Joint Research Office, Block 60, Churchill Hospital, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LE, United Kingdom.
Jane KayeNuffield Department of Population Health, HeLEX-Centre for Health, Law and Emerging Technologies at Oxford, University of Oxford, Ewert House, Ewert Place, Banbury Road, Summertown, Oxford, OX2 7DD, UK.
Johannes J M van DeldenDepartment of Medical Humanities, Division Julius Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Office Stratenum 6.131, P.O. Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Annelien L BredenoordDepartment of Medical Humanities, Division Julius Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Office Stratenum 6.131, P.O. Box 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pediatric biobanking is considered important for generating biomedical knowledge and improving (pediatric) health care. However, the inclusion of children's samples in biobanks involves specific ethical issues. One of the main concerns is how to appropriately engage children in the consent procedure. We suggest that children should be involved through a personalized assent procedure, which means that both the content and the process of assent are adjusted to the individual child. In this paper we provide guidance on how to put personalized assent into pediatric biobanking practice and consider both the content and process of personalized assent. In the discussion we argue that the assent procedure itself is formative. Investing in the procedure should be a requirement for pediatric biobank research. Although personalized assent will require certain efforts, the pediatric (biobank) community must be aware of its importance. The investment and trust earned can result in ongoing engagement, important longitudinal information, and stability in/for the research infrastructure, as well as increased knowledge among its participants about research activity. Implementing personalized assent will both respect the child and support biobank research.

Indexed as

Biological Specimen BanksBiomedical ResearchChildDecision MakingHumansInformed Consent By MinorsAssentBiological samplesChildrenConsentPediatric biobankResearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID27733160
PMCPMC5062866

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.