ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics
Improving informed consent: Stakeholder views.
Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Towards a Design Toolkit of Informed Consent Models Across Fields: A Systematic Review.Science and engineering ethics · 2022Pooled it
- Implementation of Electronic Informed Consent in Biomedical Research and Stakeholders' Perspectives: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- Acceptability and effectiveness of a study information video in improving the research consent process for youth: a non-inferiority trial.BMJ global health · 2025Trial
- Consenting practices to enhance comprehension in research involving individuals with schizophrenia and bipolar affective disorder in Uganda: a qualitative inquiry.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Impact of informed consent quality on illness uncertainty among patients with cancer in clinical trials: A cross-sectional study.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Article
- The Ethics of Decentralized Clinical Trials and Informed Consent: Taking Technologies' Soft Impacts into Account.Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2025Article
- A solution towards a viable compensation mechanism for injury from COVID-19 vaccines in Malaysia: A qualitative study.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Developing a digital informed consent app: opportunities and challenges of a new format to inform and obtain consent in public health research.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Patient priorities for fulfilling the principle of respect in research: findings from a modified Delphi study.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Improving oncology first-in-human and Window of opportunity informed consent forms through participant feedback.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- An Ethics Checklist for Digital Health Research in Psychiatry: Viewpoint.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Ethical Considerations in Clinical Trials for Disorders of Consciousness.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Reimagining IRB review to incorporate a clear and convincing standard of evidence.Accountability in research · 2022Article
- Gene Therapy and Hemophilia: Where Do We Go from Here?Journal of blood medicine · 2022Review
- Adolescent Assent and Reconsent for Biobanking: Recent Developments and Emerging Ethical Issues.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- A Study Protocol for Increasing Access to Smoking Cessation Treatments for Low-Income Minority Smokers.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Article
- Demonstrating 'respect for persons' in clinical research: findings from qualitative interviews with diverse genomics research participants.Journal of medical ethics · 2020Article
- Integrating stakeholder feedback in translational genomics research: an ethnographic analysis of a study protocol's evolution.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020Article
- Replacing Paper Informed Consent with Electronic Informed Consent for Research in Academic Medical Centers: A Scoping Review.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2020Article
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
Abstract
purposeInnovation will be required to improve the informed consent process in research. We aimed to obtain input from key stakeholders-research participants and those responsible for obtaining informed consent-to inform potential development of a multimedia informed consent "app."
methodsThis descriptive study used a mixed-methods approach. Five 90-minute focus groups were conducted with volunteer samples of former research participants and researchers/research staff responsible for obtaining informed consent. Participants also completed a brief survey that measured background information and knowledge and attitudes regarding research and the use of technology. Established qualitative methods were used to conduct the focus groups and data analysis.
resultsWe conducted five focus groups with 41 total participants: three groups with former research participants (total n = 22), and two groups with researchers and research coordinators (total n = 19). Overall, individuals who had previously participated in research had positive views regarding their experiences. However, further discussion elicited that the informed consent process often did not meet its intended objectives. Findings from both groups are presented according to three primary themes: content of consent forms, experience of the informed consent process, and the potential of technology to improve the informed consent process. A fourth theme, need for lay input on informed consent, emerged from the researcher groups.
conclusionsOur findings add to previous research that suggests that the use of interactive technology has the potential to improve the process of informed consent. However, our focus-group findings provide additional insight that technology cannot replace the human connection that is central to the informed consent process. More research that incorporates the views of key stakeholders is needed to ensure that multimedia consent processes do not repeat the mistakes of paper-based consent forms.
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.