Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29766088›Full record

ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2017

Protecting study participants in emergency research: is community consultation before trial commencement enough?

Blair Henry, Adic Perez, Sandy Trpcic, Sandro Rizoli, Barto Nascimento

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01545232 (Pragmatic, Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT01545232 phase3completednot on this map

Pragmatic, Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe University of Texas Health Science Center, HoustonRan2012 to 2013Enrolled680ConditionsTraumaArms1:1:1 Blood Transfusion Ratio, 1:1:2 Blood Transfusion Ratio
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Meeting unique requirements: Community consultation and public disclosure for research in emergency setting using exception from informed consent.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2021
    Review
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.

Blair HenryDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Adic PerezDepartment of General Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Critical Care Medicine, Toronto, Canada.
Sandy TrpcicTrauma & Acute Care, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
Sandro RizoliTrauma & Acute Care, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
Barto NascimentoDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis article presents the results of a community consultation (CC) process completed in Toronto, Ontario, using a random digit dialling technique, on the attitudes and perceptions of the public toward the use of exception from informed consent when conducting emergency research involving the use of massive blood transfusions.

methodsIn 2012, our hospital conducted a CC, using a random digit dialling technique, to elicit the attitudes and perceptions of the public toward the use of an exemption from informed consent for an upcoming clinical trial. A total of 500 participants from high violent crime areas were interviewed as part of this consultation.

resultsThe response rate for the telephone survey was 54%. Participants indicated a personal acceptance rate of 76%, acceptance of the justification for the exception to consent at 81%, thatthe study would meet the best interest of patients and the community at 81% and that youth (between 15 and 18 years) could be enrolled at 71%. When offered, no participant requested an opt-out wrist band to avoid being enrolled in this study. DISCUSSION: The use of violent crime neighborhoods to locate at risk communities was not effective in identifying the appropriate community of interest for this study. Though only representing a small subpopulation from a large Canadian city, the attitudes noted here is suggestive that Canadians may have a similar level of acceptance as the US based on published studies. However, given the resources needed to undertake this process and that in the end it did not elicit any useful feedback or recommendations for enhancing the safety of participants, the future use of phone surveys as a means of engaging communities should be reconsidered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE LEVEL V: This is a retrospective subanalysis of a CC using a randomized phone dialling technique from a site prior to the start of the Pragmatic Randomized Optimal Platelet and Plasma Ratios Trial. The CC was not designed specifically for research purposes and as such reflect only a case study from a single center. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Pre-result, NCT01545232.

Identifiers

PMID29766088
PMCPMC5877900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.