Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33605030›Full record

ArticleDeveloping world bioethics2022

Ethical challenges in consent procedures involving pediatric cancer patients in Saudi Arabia: An exploratory survey.

Ghiath Alahmad, Muneera AlSaqabi, Hala Alkamli, Mona Aleidan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Developing world bioethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Providing Ethical Care for Children with Cancer: Nurses' Perspectives.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery research
    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.

Muneera AlSaqabi
Hala Alkamli
Mona Aleidan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pediatric cancer is accompanied by many ethical challenges, particularly those related to respecting the child's opinion and parental responsibility and consent. Questionnaires were collected from 400 participants, from four equal groups: doctors, nurses, parents and medical students, from three cities in Saudi Arabia, about three problematic issues which revolve around the mandatory consent of one or both parents, the extent of a child's assent, and the acceptable form of consent and assent. Despite the diversity of the participants' cultural backgrounds, most preferred both parents to give consent, followed by either parent without differentiation between parents, which reinforced a trend towards more gender equality. The majority of participants preferred that parental consent forms be detailed enough to obtain the maximum information, while others chose medium-size consent forms; a large majority preferred that the form seeking to obtain the assent of the child with cancer be short, reflecting their desire not to increase the burden on the child, in addition to the fact that the final decision belongs to the parents rather than the child. Most participants preferred to rely on a child's level of maturity rather than having reached a certain age so that they could give assent, while the rest considered the age of 13-14 as a suitable age. These findings reflect an increasing ethical awareness regarding parental consent and child assent, and they can be formulated in a recommendation for a more ethical practice in the field of childhood cancer and pediatrics in general.

Indexed as

Informed ConsentNeoplasmsChildDecision MakingHumansParental ConsentParentsSaudi ArabiaSurveys and Questionnairesassentcancerchildrenconsent

Identifiers

PMID33605030
PMCPMC9544793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.