ArticleJournal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association2024
Parental perspectives on a trial using waived informed consent at birth.
Article in Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association, 2024. 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.
- Parent perspectives on neonatal research without prior consent: a mixed-methods interview study.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Piloting the better research interactions for every family (BRIEF) researcher intervention to support recruitment for a neonatal clinical trial: parent experience and infant enrollment.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo determine parental perspectives in a trial with waived consent. STUDY
designAnonymous survey of birth parents with term infants who were randomized using a waiver of consent, administered after infant discharge.
results121 (11%) survey responses were collected. Of the 121 responding parents 111 (92%) reported that this form of consent was acceptable and 116 (96%) reported feeling comfortable having another child participate in a similar study. 110 (91%) respondents reported that they both understood the information provided in the consent process and had enough time to consider participation. Four percent had a negative opinion on the study's effect on their child's health.
conclusionsMost responding parents reported both acceptability of this study design in the neonatal period and that the study had a positive effect on their child's health. Future work should investigate additional ways to involve parents and elicit feedback on varied methods of pediatric consent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38129598What 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.