Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30941634›Full record

ArticleLa Radiologia medica2019

Dematerialisation of patient's informed consent in radiology: insights on current status and radiologists' opinion from an Italian online survey.

Francesca Coppola, Lorenzo Faggioni, Roberto Grassi, Corrado Bibbolino, Agatina Rizzo, Nicoletta Gandolfo, Antonella Calvisi, Carlo Alberto Cametti, Giorgio Benea, Andrea Giovagnoni and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in La Radiologia medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Francesca CoppolaDepartment of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine, S. Orsola Malpighi University Hospital, Bologna, Italy.
Lorenzo FaggioniDiagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56100, Pisa, Italy. lfaggioni@sirm.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5262-4489
Roberto GrassiDepartment of Radiology, University of Campania "L. Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Corrado BibbolinoSNR Foundation, Rome, Italy.
Agatina RizzoUOC Radiodiagnostica, AOU Policlinico Vittorio Emanuele, Catania, Italy.
Nicoletta GandolfoDepartment of Imaging, ASL 3 Genovese - Villa Scassi Hospital, Genoa, Italy.
Antonella CalvisiDepartment of Radiology, USL N. 3 - S. Francesco Hospital, Nuoro, Italy.
Carlo Alberto CamettiDepartment of Radiology, ASL TO2 - San G. Bosco Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Giorgio BeneaDepartment of Interventional and Diagnostic Radiology, Arcispedale Sant'Anna, Ferrara, Italy.
Andrea GiovagnoniRadiology Department, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.
Carmelo PriviteraUOC Radiodiagnostica, AOU Policlinico Vittorio Emanuele, Catania, Italy.
Daniele ReggeDepartment of Radiology, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, Candiolo, Turin, Italy.
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico - Vittorio Emanuele · ITArcispedale Sant'Anna · ITCandiolo Cancer Institute · ITIRCCS Azienda Ospedliero-Universitaria di Bologna Policlinico di Sant'Orsola · ITMarche Polytechnic University · ITOspedale San Giovanni Bosco · ITUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITUniversity of Pisa · ITVilla Torri Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the current status of patient's informed consent (PIC) management at radiological centres and the overall opinion of radiologist active members of the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) about PIC dematerialisation through an online survey. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All members were invited to join the survey as an initiative by the Imaging Informatics Chapter of SIRM. The survey consisted of 11 multiple-choice questions about participants' demographics, current local modalities of PIC acquisition and storage, perceived advantages and disadvantages of PIC dematerialisation over conventional paper-based PIC, and overall opinion about PIC dematerialisation.

resultsA total of 1791 radiologists (amounting to 17.4% of active SIRM members for the year 2016) joined the survey. Perceived advantages of PIC dematerialisation were easier and faster PIC recovery (96.5%), safer storage and conservation (94.5%), and reduced costs (90.7%). Conversely, the need to create dedicated areas for PIC acquisition inside each radiological unit (64.0%) and to gain preliminary approval for the use of advanced digital signature tools from patients (51.8%) were seen as potential disadvantages. Overall, 94.5% of respondents had a positive opinion about PIC dematerialisation.

conclusionRadiologists were mostly favourable to PIC dematerialisation. However, concerns were raised that its practical implementation might face hurdles due to its complexity in current real life working conditions.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth Care SurveysRadiologyAdultAgedHumansInformed ConsentItalyMiddle AgedRadiology Information SystemsDematerialisationInformed consentOnline surveyPaperless

Identifiers

PMID30941634
OpenAlexW2931644763

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.