Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34020995›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2021

Parental and professional perceptions of informed consent and participation in a time-critical neonatal trial: a mixed-methods study in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

Stuti Pant, Maya Annie Elias, Kerry Woolfall, Maria Moreno Morales, Bensitta Lincy, Ismat Jahan, Samanmali P Sumanasena, Siddarth Ramji, Seetha Shankaran, Sudhin Thayyil and 1 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02387385 (Hypothermia for Encephalopathy in Low and Middle-Income Countries Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

NCT02387385 nacompletednot on this map

Hypothermia for Encephalopathy in Low and Middle-Income Countries Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorThayyil, SudhinRan2015 to 2020Enrolled408ConditionsNeonatal EncephalopathyArmsWhole body cooling (Tecotherm)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Stuti PantCentre for Perinatal Neuroscience, Imperial College London, London, UK s.pant@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3912-5965
Maya Annie EliasPerinatal Trials Unit Foundation, Bengaluru, India.ORCID 0000-0003-3855-0801
Kerry WoolfallInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, Merseyside, UK.
Maria Moreno MoralesCentre for Perinatal Neuroscience, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Bensitta LincyPerinatal Trials Unit Foundation, Chennai, India.
Ismat JahanDepartment of Neonatology, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka, Dhaka District, Bangladesh.
Samanmali P SumanasenaDisability Studies Department, University of Kelaniya, Kelaniya, Sri Lanka.
Siddarth RamjiPediatrics, Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, Delhi, India.
Seetha ShankaranNeonatal- Perinatal Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Sudhin ThayyilCentre for Perinatal Neuroscience, Imperial College London, London, UK.
HELIX Trial consortium investigators
Imperial College London · GBBangladesh Medical University · BDMaulana Azad Medical College · INUniversity of Kelaniya · LKUniversity of Liverpool · GBWayne State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTime-critical neonatal trials in low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs) raise several ethical issues. Using a qualitative-dominant mixed-methods design, we explored informed consent process in Hypothermia for encephalopathy in low and middle-income countries (HELIX) trial conducted in India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

methodsTerm infants with neonatal encephalopathy, aged less than 6 hours, were randomly allocated to cooling therapy or usual care, following informed parental consent. The consenting process was audio-video (A-V) recorded in all cases. We analysed A-V records of the consent process using a 5-point Likert scale on three parameters-empathy, information and autonomy. In addition, we used exploratory observation method to capture relevant aspects of consent process and discussions between parents and professionals. Finally, we conducted in-depth interviews with a subgroup of 20 parents and 15 healthcare professionals. A thematic analysis was performed on the observations of A-V records and on the interview transcripts.

resultsA total of 294 A-V records of the HELIX trial were analysed. Median (IQR) score for empathy, information and autonomy was 5 (0), 5 (1) and 5 (1), respectively. However, thematic analysis suggested that the consenting was a ceremonial process; and parental decision to participate was based on unreserved trust in the treating doctors, therapeutic misconception and access to an expensive treatment free of cost. Most parents did not understand the concept of a clinical trial nor the nature of the intervention. Professionals showed a strong bias towards cooling therapy and reported time constraints and explaining to multiple family members as key challenges.

conclusionDespite rigorous research governance and consent process, parental decisions were heavily influenced by situational incapacity and a trust in doctors to make the right decision on their behalf. Further research is required to identify culturally and context-appropriate strategies for informed trial participation.

Indexed as

Informed ConsentParentsBangladeshHumansIndiaInfantInfant, NewbornPerceptionSri Lankachild healthclinical trialpublic healthqualitative studyrandomised control trial

Identifiers

PMID34020995
PMCPMC8144040
OpenAlexW3162717296

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.