Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37174813›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Consent for Teaching-The Experience of Pediatrics and Psychiatry.

Bárbara Frade Moreira, Cristina Costa Santos, Ivone Duarte

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Bárbara Frade MoreiraFaculty of Medicine, University of Porto, 4200-319 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-9908-5678
Cristina Costa SantosDepartment of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences (MEDCIDS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, 4200-319 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-7109-1101
Ivone DuarteDepartment of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences (MEDCIDS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, 4200-319 Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5160-7043

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Informed consent protects patients' right of autonomy, as they may refuse to participate in clinical teaching. In Pediatrics, young people aged 16 or over, and with the necessary judgment, may consent; in Psychiatry, consent is also essential due to the personal nature of the subjects addressed. This study aimed mainly to assess the practical application of informed consent in medical education. An observational cross-sectional study was developed, and an interview-like questionnaire was applied to participants waiting for a scheduled consultation for themselves or the person they represented, in Pediatrics and Psychiatry. Only 54% of Pediatrics participants and 75% of Psychiatry participants stated that the physician asked them if they minded the students' presence and an even smaller percentage from both departments affirmed that students introduced themselves as medical students and requested their consent to examine them. Patients feel satisfied to contribute to the students' training, although a considerable percentage of them had experiences without being informed or asked for consent, which represents an evident disrespect for their autonomy. There is a need to intervene and provide an adequate education of ethical values in clinical practice to students.

Indexed as

clinical teachinginformed consentmedical educationmedical ethicsmedical studentspediatricspsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID37174813
PMCPMC10178240

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.