Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36434585›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2022

An e-consent framework for tiered informed consent for human genomic research in the global south, implemented as a REDCap template.

Tsaone Tamuhla, Nicki Tiffin, Taryn Allie

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Medical researchersZhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025
    Article
  7. Building Patient-Facing Technology: A REDCap-Based Approach.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tsaone TamuhlaDivision of Computational Biology, Integrative Biomedical Sciences Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Nicki TiffinDivision of Computational Biology, Integrative Biomedical Sciences Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. ntiffin@sanbi.ac.za.ORCID 0000-0001-5083-2735
Taryn AllieDivision of Computational Biology, Integrative Biomedical Sciences Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
University of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

H3ABioNet: informatics solutions for H3AfricaU24HG006941 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN · PI MULDER, NICOLA · 2017 to 2021
$12.9M
Medical Research Council MC_PC_MR/T037733/1NHGRI NIH HHS U24 HG006941
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research involving human participants requires their consent, and it is common practice to capture consent information on paper and store those hard copies, presenting issues such as long-term storage requirements, inefficient retrieval of consent forms for reference or future use, and the potential for transcription errors when transcribing captured informed consent. There have been calls to move to electronic capture of the consent provided by research participants (e-consent) as a way of addressing these issues. A tiered framework for e-consent was designed using the freely available features in the inbuilt REDCap e-consent module. We implemented 'branching logic', 'wet signature' and 'auto-archiver' features to the main informed consent and withdrawal of consent documents. The branching logic feature streamlines the consent process by making follow-up information available depending on participant response, the 'wet signature' feature enables a timestamped electronic signature to be appended to the e-consent documents and the 'auto-archiver' allows for PDF copies of the e-consent documents to be stored in the database. When designing the content layout, we provided example participant information text which can be modified as required. Emphasis was placed on the flow of information to optimise participant understanding and this was achieved by merging the consent and participant information into one document where the consent questions were asked immediately after the corresponding participant information. In addition, we have provided example text for a generic human genomic research study, which can be easily edited and modified according to specific requirements. Building informed consent protocols and forms without prior experience can be daunting, so we have provided researchers with a REDCap template that can be directly incorporated into REDCap databases. It prompts researchers about the types of consent they can request for genomics studies and assists them with suggestions for the language they might use for participant information and consent questions. The use of this tiered e-consent module can ensure the accurate and efficient electronic capture and storage of the consents given by participants in a format that can be easily queried and can thus facilitate ethical and effective onward sharing of data and samples whilst upholding individual participant preferences.

Indexed as

Consent FormsInformed ConsentGenomicsHumansLanguageResearch Personnelparticipant informationREDCapTiered informed consent

Identifiers

PMID36434585
PMCPMC9694827
OpenAlexW4310051817

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.