ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics
An empirical assessment of the short-term impacts of a reading of Deborah Zoe Laufer's drama Informed Consent on attitudes and intentions to participate in genetic research.
Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study assessed the short-term impact of the play "Informed Consent" by Deborah Zoe Laufer (a fictionalized look at the controversy over specimens collected from the Havasupai Tribe for diabetes research in 1989) on perceptions of trust, willingness to donate biospecimens, and attitudes toward harm and privacy among the medical and undergraduate students, faculty, and the public in the Intermountain West.
methodsSurveys were administered before and after a staged reading of the play by professional actors. Survey items included the short form Trust in Medical Researchers, and single-item questions about group identity, ethics of genetic testing in children, and willingness to donate biospecimens. In addition, respondents were given the option to answer open-ended questions through e-mail.
resultsOut of the 481 who attended the play, 421 completed both the pre and post surveys, and 166 participants completed open-ended questions online approximately 1 week after the play. Across all participants, there were significant declines for trust in medical researchers and for the survey item "is it ethical for investigators to test children for adult onset diseases" (p < .001 for both) following the play. There was a significant increase in agreement to improve group identity protections (p < .001) and there were no differences on willingness to donate biospecimens to research (p = .777). Qualitative data provided extensive contextual data supporting these perspectives. DISCUSSION: This is one of the first studies to document short-term impacts of a theatrical performance on both attitudes and behavioral intentions toward research ethics and clinical research participation. Future research should continue to explore the impact of theatrical performances among public and investigators on the ethical issues and complexities in clinical research.
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.