Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30247010›Full record

Trial reportCanadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie2018

e-Consent: approaching surgical consent with mobile technology

Allison Bethune, Marisol Davila-Foyo, Mikaeel Valli, Leodante da Costa

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions to Improve Patient Comprehension in Informed Consent for Medical and Surgical Procedures: An Updated Systematic Review.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Multimodal Wearable Biosensing Meets Multidomain AI: A Pathway to Decentralized Healthcare.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Digital consent in gynecology: an evaluation of patient experience.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Improving Surgical Informed Consent: Unanswered Questions.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2021
    Review
  12. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Allison BethuneFrom the Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Bethune, Costa, Davila-Foyo); and the Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Valli).
Marisol Davila-FoyoFrom the Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Bethune, Costa, Davila-Foyo); and the Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Valli).
Mikaeel ValliFrom the Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Bethune, Costa, Davila-Foyo); and the Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Valli).
Leodante da CostaFrom the Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Bethune, Costa, Davila-Foyo); and the Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont. (Valli).
University of Toronto · CAHealth Sciences Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Patient recall of information about procedures, including risks and benefits and potential outcomes, is often insufficient. We sought to determine whether a multimedia educational tool enhances the informed consent discussion for elective neurosurgical procedures by increasing patient knowledge of the procedure. Methods: Adult patients from a single neurosurgical site eligible for 4 neurosurgical procedures (lumbar spine or cervical spine decompression for degenerative disease, craniotomy for brain tumour or trigeminal neuralgia treatment) were offered enrolment. Patients were randomly assigned to either the control arm (standard consent discussion) or the intervention arm (review of an e-book containing information tailored to their disease/injury plus standard consent discussion). Participants completed a 14-item questionnaire before and after the consent discussion. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 38 participants, 18 in the control group and 20 in the intervention group. The mean age was 62.2 (standard deviation [SD] 13.6) years and did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. The mean baseline questionnaire scores were similar for the control and intervention groups (20.4 [SD 7.3] v. 20.6 [SD 6.7]). However, the mean scores on the follow-up questionnaire were significantly different between the 2 groups (20.2 [SD 4.0] v. 23.2 [SD 4.9], Conclusion: The use of an electronic booklet appears to improve patients’ knowledge of their surgical procedure. The use of multimedia booklets in clinical practice could help standardize and optimize the consent process, ensuring that patients receive the relevant information to make a truly informed decision.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeInformed ConsentMultimediaNeurosurgical ProceduresPatient Education as TopicAgedElective Surgical ProceduresFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID30247010
PMCPMC6153099
OpenAlexW2984119172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.