Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34222708›Full record

ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2021

Implementation of documented and written informed consent for clinical trials of communicable diseases: Lessons learned, barriers, solutions, future directions identified during the conduct of a COVID-19 clinical trial.

Patricia Woods, Maura Flynn, Paul Monach, Karen Visnaw, Sara Schiller, Erika Holmberg, Sarah Leatherman, Ryan Ferguson, Westyn Branch-Elliman

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04359901 (Sarilumab for Patients With Moderate COVID-19 Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT04359901 phase2completednot on this map

Sarilumab for Patients With Moderate COVID-19 Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial With a Play-The-Winner Design

TypeinterventionalSponsorWestyn Branch-EllimanRan2020 to 2021Enrolled50ConditionsCOVIDArmsSARILUMAB
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

9 authors.

Patricia WoodsMassachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) and CSP Coordinating Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Maura FlynnMassachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) and CSP Coordinating Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Paul MonachMassachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) and CSP Coordinating Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Karen VisnawMassachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) and CSP Coordinating Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Sara SchillerMassachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) and CSP Coordinating Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Erika HolmbergMassachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) and CSP Coordinating Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Sarah LeathermanMassachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) and CSP Coordinating Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Ryan FergusonMassachusetts Veterans Epidemiology Research and Information Center (MAVERIC) and CSP Coordinating Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Westyn Branch-EllimanVA Boston Healthcare System, Department of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveThe communicable nature of many infectious diseases, including SARS-CoV-2, creates challenges for implementing and obtaining regulatory-compliant written informed consent. The goal of this project was to identify and evaluate processes that address these barriers while maintaining clinical and research staff safety.

methodsWe reviewed Federal Drug Administration (FDA), World Health Organization (WHO), and VA Office of Research and Development (ORD) guidance about informed consent during the COVID-19 pandemic, and identified and pilot-tested several mechanisms for obtaining regulatory-compliant consent during our COVID-19 therapeutics clinical trial.

resultsSeveral processes were identified. These included a standard face-to-face consent with a plan for maintaining a paper copy of the signed consent form, a phone or video chat consent process that included taking a picture of the signed consent form or a screen shot of the signed document during a video chat, integration of the consent forms into software embedded within the electronic health record, and secure software programs with electronic signature. These processes are FDA-compliant but time-intensive, often requiring four or more hours of coordination between the clinical team, research staff, patients, and legally authorized representatives.

conclusionsFuture studies could evaluate how to improve efficiency, and whether some elements of the consenting process, such as the requirement for documented written signed consent, rather than a witnessed oral consent, is an acceptable standard for research participants with communicable diseases.

Identifiers

PMID34222708
PMCPMC8234262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.