ArticleBlood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue2023
A comprehensive analysis of the readability of consent forms for blood transfusion in Spain.
Article in Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consent for transfusion: global practices, documentation and patient understanding - a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Digitalizing informed consent in healthcare: a scoping review.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Readability of Informed Consent Forms for Medical and Surgical Clinical Procedures: A Systematic Review.Clinics and practice · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the readability of consent forms for blood transfusion in public hospitals in Spain. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a cross-sectional, national study conducted within the Spanish healthcare system. Data were collected through the online retrieval of consent documents and direct consultation with 223 public hospitals. Consent forms were subjected to readability assessment including typographical, grammatical and lexical dimensions. The INFLESZ scale, a well-validated instrument adapted to the reading habits of Spaniards, was applied to determine the grammatical readability of the documents. The Spanish Mosby's Dictionary and the Dictionary of Spanish were used together to systematically identify the number of medical terms contained in the text. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
resultsForty-five written consent forms for blood transfusion, in use in 126 general public hospitals were evaluated for various parameters, including font size (χ̄ =10.41), abbreviations (χ̄ =10.58), word count (χ̄ =595, 209 min-1,499 max) and length (1 to 7 pages). The overall readability score (χ̄ =50.66) was indicative that consent forms are somewhat difficult to read. A heterogeneity of 116 different healthcare terminology words was identified. Word count was statistically and moderately positively related to the number of medical terms identified in the text (rho=0.496, p=0.001) and the INFLESZ score (rho=0.34, p=0.023). DISCUSSION: In this first national study to assess the ease of reading written information on blood transfusion given to patients, deficiencies were found in the three dimensions of readability (typographical, grammatical and lexical) and a lack of uniformity among the written consent forms is pronounced. Further research is needed to develop more person-centered tools to support patients in the process of consenting for blood transfusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.