Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35665330›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022

Informed Consent in Clinical Studies Involving Human Participants: Ethical Insights of Medical Researchers in Germany and Poland.

Cristian Timmermann, Marcin Orzechowski, Oxana Kosenko, Katarzyna Woniak, Florian Steger

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Topography of Human Subjects Research Ethics in Uzbekistan: Analysis Using the Emanuel Benchmarks.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2025
    Article
  3. Assessing the Integrity of Clinical Trials Included in Evidence Syntheses.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cristian TimmermannInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Marcin OrzechowskiInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Oxana KosenkoInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Katarzyna WoniakInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Florian StegerInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Universität Ulm · DEUniversity of Augsburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The internationalization of clinical studies requires a shared understanding of the fundamental ethical values guiding clinical studies. It is important that these values are not only embraced at the legal level but also adopted by clinicians themselves during clinical studies. Objective: Our goal is to provide an insight on how clinicians in Germany and Poland perceive and identify the different ethical issues regarding informed consent in clinical studies. Methods: To gain an understanding of how clinicians view clinical studies in the countries they work in, we carried out semi-structured problem-centered interviews per telephone in Poland ( Results: Clinicians generally supported the normative framework, even though they considered it quite complex. In the two study countries, a widely noted dilemma in the information process was whether to overburden participants with extensive information or risking leaving out important facts. Clinicians were ready to exclude larger population groups from participating in clinical studies when the information process could not be carried out with standard procedures or when their inclusion was ethically sensitive. Conclusion: Clinicians need to gain a better understanding of the consequences of excluding larger population groups form participating in clinical studies. They should seek assistance in improving the information process for the inclusion of underrepresented groups in clinical studies.

Indexed as

Central and Eastern Europeclinical trialsinformed consentmedical ethicsresearch ethics

Identifiers

PMID35665330
PMCPMC9161350
OpenAlexW4280650762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.