Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29186155›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Using iterative learning to improve understanding during the informed consent process in a South African psychiatric genomics study.

Megan M Campbell, Ezra Susser, Sumaya Mall, Sibonile G Mqulwana, Michael M Mndini, Odwa A Ntola, Mohamed Nagdee, Zukiswa Zingela, Stephanus Van Wyk, Dan J Stein

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Megan M CampbellDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9576-8562
Ezra SusserDepartment of Epidemiology. Joseph Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University and New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York.
Sumaya MallDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Sibonile G MqulwanaDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Michael M MndiniDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Odwa A NtolaDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Mohamed NagdeeDepartment of Psychology, Rhodes University and Fort England Hospital, Grahamstown, South Africa.
Zukiswa ZingelaDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences, Walter Sisulu University, Mthatha, South Africa.
Stephanus Van WykDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences, Walter Sisulu University, Mthatha, South Africa.
Dan J SteinDepartment of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, South Africa, and the MRC Unit on Risk and Resilience in Mental Disorders.
University of Cape Town · ZAWalter Sisulu University · ZANew York Psychoanalytic Society and Institute · USRhodes University · ZA

Funding

3/3 GENOMICS OF SCHIZOPHRENIA IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN XHOSAU01MH096754 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN · PI STEIN, DAN JOSEPH · 2013 to 2017
$3.2M
1/3 - Genomics of Schizophrenia in the South Africa XhosaU01MH096756 · NIMH · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SUSSER, EZRA S. · 2013 to 2017
$1.8M
NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH096754NIMH NIH HHS U01 MH096756
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Obtaining informed consent is a great challenge in global health research. There is a need for tools that can screen for and improve potential research participants' understanding of the research study at the time of recruitment. Limited empirical research has been conducted in low and middle income countries, evaluating informed consent processes in genomics research. We sought to investigate the quality of informed consent obtained in a South African psychiatric genomics study. A Xhosa language version of the University of California, San Diego Brief Assessment of Capacity to Consent Questionnaire (UBACC) was used to screen for capacity to consent and improve understanding through iterative learning in a sample of 528 Xhosa people with schizophrenia and 528 controls. We address two questions: firstly, whether research participants' understanding of the research study improved through iterative learning; and secondly, what were predictors for better understanding of the research study at the initial screening? During screening 290 (55%) cases and 172 (33%) controls scored below the 14.5 cut-off for acceptable understanding of the research study elements, however after iterative learning only 38 (7%) cases and 13 (2.5%) controls continued to score below this cut-off. Significant variables associated with increased understanding of the consent included the psychiatric nurse recruiter conducting the consent screening, higher participant level of education, and being a control. The UBACC proved an effective tool to improve understanding of research study elements during consent, for both cases and controls. The tool holds utility for complex studies such as those involving genomics, where iterative learning can be used to make significant improvements in understanding of research study elements. The UBACC may be particularly important in groups with severe mental illness and lower education levels. Study recruiters play a significant role in managing the quality of the informed consent process.

Indexed as

GenomicsInformed ConsentLearningPsychiatryHumansSchizophreniaSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID29186155
PMCPMC5707000
OpenAlexW2775178462

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.