Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30429665›Full record

ReviewBiochemia medica2018

Informed consent and ethics committee approval in laboratory medicine.

Ana Borovecki, Ana Mlinaric, Martina Horvat, Vesna Supak Smolcic

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biochemia medica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Single Core Genome Sequencing for Detection of bothInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  20. The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Materials and Methods.International journal of endocrinology and metabolism · 2019
    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

4 authors.

Ana Borovecki"Andrija Štampar" School of Public Health, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia.
Ana MlinaricResearch Integrity Editor, Biochemia Medica.
Martina HorvatResearch Integrity Editor, Biochemia Medica.
Vesna Supak SmolcicResearch Integrity Editor, Biochemia Medica.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Informed consent is a process in which a human subject who is to participate in research needs to give his or her consent after being properly informed of the expected benefits as well as the potential harm of the research that will be performed. The function and purpose of the research ethics committee is to ensure that the research that will take place is in accordance with the relevant ethical standards. This means that the committee must assess the appropriateness of the design of the study reviewed. Research in the field of laboratory medicine has specific features,

Indexed as

Ethics, MedicalInformed ConsentClinical Laboratory Techniquesethical approvalethics committeesinformed consentlaboratory medicineresearch

Identifiers

PMID30429665
PMCPMC6214688

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.