Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33747803›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of psychiatry2021

Rapid commentary: Ethical implications for clinical trialists and patients associated with COVID-19 research.

Gayathri Delanerolle, Shanaya Rathod, Kathryn Elliot, Rema Ramakrishnan, Tony Thayanandan, Natasha Sandle, Nyla Haque, Vanessa Raymont, Peter Phiri

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Gayathri DelanerolleDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Shanaya RathodResearch and Development Department, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton SO30 3JB, United Kingdom.
Kathryn ElliotResearch and Development Department, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton SO30 3JB, United Kingdom.
Rema RamakrishnanNuffield Department of Women's and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Tony ThayanandanDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Natasha SandleDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Nyla HaqueDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Vanessa RaymontDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7JX, United Kingdom.
Peter PhiriResearch and Development Department, Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton SO30 3JB, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pandemics disrupt clinical trials worldwide, with lasting effects on research. It can severely impact clinical trialists ability to conduct safe and ethically uncompromised trials. Hence, the mounting pressure results in ethically and morally distressing decisions faced by clinical trial professionals during pandemic situations. Whilst clinical trialists attempt to think about preparedness and responses during a pandemic, the need to have an ethical framework that has real-world applicability is imperative. Pandemics are a challenging time for all, however, the safety and access to support for clinical trialists and patients within clinical trials should be at the forefront for their organisations and the government.

Indexed as

Clinical trialsCOVID-19EthicsPandemicPatientsTrialists

Identifiers

PMID33747803
PMCPMC7953365

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.