SynthesisBMC medical research methodology2020
Improving assent in health research: a rapid systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Missing assent: a global systematic review of ethical practices in HIV research with men who have sex with men (MSM) under 18.BMC medical ethics · 2026Pooled it
- Honoring childhood agency in developmental research: Best practices, applications, and insights.Methods in Psychology (Online) · 2025Article
- Analysis of pediatric assent information in early-phase cancer clinical trials through a children's research advisory group.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Assessment of Consent Comprehension Among Kenyan Adolescents, Young Adults, and Parents: Comparison of Enhanced and Standard Consenting Procedures.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2024Article
- Comprehension by Caregivers and Adolescents of Clinical Trial Information Delivered via Multimedia Video Versus Conventional Practice: Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2023Article
- What information and the extent of information to be provided in an informed assent/consent form of pediatric drug trials.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Four reasons why too many informed consents to clinical research are invalid: a critical analysis of current practices.BMJ open · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnrolment in a research study requires the participant's informed consent. In the case of minors, informed consent of the respective legal guardian is obtained in conjunction with informed assent of the underage p articipant. Since comprehension of the information provided may be limited, effective interventions to improve understanding should be identified. Thus, it is the objective of this study to review quantitative studies that tested interventions to improve the understanding of information provided during assent processes in health research. The studied population consisted of minors that participated or were willing to participate in research. The primary outcome was the level of comprehension after intervention.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in eleven databases including regional databases: PubMed, Web of Science, ERIC, PsycINFO, CINAHL, POPLINE, AIM, LILACS, WPRIM, IMSEAR, and IMEMR and included references from inception of the database until July 2018 except PubMed which spanned the period from May 2013 to July 2018. Search terms focused on Informed Consent/Assent, Minors, and Comprehension. To complement the search, reference lists of retrieved publications were additionally searched. We included all quantitative studies that were conducted in minors, tested an intervention, covered assent processes in health research, and assessed comprehension. One reviewer screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to determine eligibility and collected data on study design, population, intervention, methods, outcome, and for critical appraisal. Interventions comprised enhanced paper forms, interspersed questions, multimedia format, and others.
resultsOut of 7089 studies initially identified, 19 studies comprising 2805 participants and conducted in seven countries were included in the review. Fourteen studies (74 %) tested an intervention against control and ten (53 %) were randomized controlled trials. Heterogeneous methodology as well as incomplete outcome and statistical reporting impaired the reliability of the collected data. Positive effects were suggested for use of enhanced paper forms, interspersed questions, use of pie charts, and organizational factors.
conclusionsImproving assent in health research is an under-researched area with little reliable evidence. While some interventions are proposed to improve understanding in assent processes, further investigation is necessary to be able to give evidence-based recommendations.
trial registrationPROSPERO ID: 106808.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.