ArticleCureus2023
Greater Patient Than Staff Satisfaction Scores for Electronic Consent.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Exploring knowledge and attitudes toward electronic informed consent among clinical trial participants in China: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Informed consent is essential for surgical procedures, and using electronic consent (e-consent) has many benefits, including improved patient understanding and digitally enabled care. Following e-consent implementation at Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust, Harlow, UK, we aimed to compare staff and patient satisfaction scores for the first time. Methodology Voluntary feedback was obtained via online questionnaires for patient and staff users. Average satisfaction scores were calculated, and comments were analysed using grounded theory and thematic analysis. Results Eight hundred and fifty-three counts of patient feedback and 36 counts of staff feedback were received. An average rating of e-consent for patients was 4.5 out of 5 and for staff was 2.8 out of 5. Fifty-one percent of patient comments and 25% of staff comments were positive. The main themes identified were information for patients, digital concerns, user experience, and functionality. There were conflicting positive and negative views from both groups within these themes. Conclusions E-consent enables informed consent for procedures, with greater satisfaction amongst patients than staff. The main factor that was appreciated by patients and staff is the ability of e-consent to facilitate fully informed consent.
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.