Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31541540›Full record

ArticleEthics & human research2019

Improving Translation and Cultural Appropriateness of Spanish-Language Consent Materials for Biobanks.

Kathleen M Brelsford, Ernesto Ruiz, Catherine M Hammack, Laura M Beskow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ethics & human research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Kathleen M BrelsfordResearch assistant professor in the Center for Biomedical Ethics & Society at Vanderbilt University Medical Center.
Ernesto RuizPostdoctoral fellow in the Department of Family and Community Medicine at Meharry Medical College.
Catherine M HammackAssociate in health policy in the Center for Biomedical Ethics & Society at Vanderbilt University Medical Center.
Laura M BeskowProfessor and the Ann Geddes Stahlman chair in medical ethics in the Center for Biomedical Ethics & Society at Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

Funding

ENHANCING THE BIOBANKING INFORMED CONSENT PROCESS TO IMPROVE COMPREHENSIONR01HG006621 · NHGRI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI BESKOW, LAURA M. · 2012 to 2015
$1.6M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG006621
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing proportion of prospective research participants in the United States speak limited or no English. We conducted cognitive interviews with native Spanish speakers to test Spanish-language translations of simplified and traditional biobank consent forms. Comprehension was generally high and did not differ by form. Most of those who received the simplified form felt it contained the right amount of information, compared with fewer than half of those who received the traditional form. Qualitative results allowed us to identify overarching issues related to tone, formality, and voice that may affect prospective participants' trust and willingness to participate. Certain characteristics of written Spanish are seemingly at odds with recommended actions to simplify consent forms; thus, even when significant empirical effort has been expended to develop simplified consent materials in English, additional work is needed to ensure the accuracy, comprehensibility, and cultural-congruence of Spanish-language translations.

Indexed as

Biological Specimen BanksComprehensionConsent FormsCultureTranslatingAdultFemaleHispanic or LatinoHumansMaleProspective StudiesUnited StatesYoung Adultbiobanksconsent formshuman subjects researchtranslation

Identifiers

PMID31541540
PMCPMC6856797

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.