ArticleBMJ open2024
Evaluating the impact of a SIMPlified LaYered consent process on recruitment of potential participants to the
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06168474 (Evaluating the Impact of a SIMPlified LaYered Consent Process on Recruitment of Potential Participants to the Staphylococcus Aureus Network Adaptive Platform Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
Evaluating the Impact of a SIMPlified LaYered Consent Process on Recruitment of Potential Participants to the Staphylococcus Aureus Network Adaptive Platform Trial: a Pragmatic Nested Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding how the informed consent process influences the decision to participate in an adaptive platform trial: A scoping review.PloS one · 2026Article
- Article
- Revolutionizing patient recruitment experience in trials using the design-thinking framework.Perspectives in clinical researchReview
- Perspectives of Information Access in the Informed Consent Process for Clinical Research Participation in Australia.Ethics & human researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInformed consent forms (ICFs) for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) can be onerous and lengthy. The process has the potential to overwhelm patients with information, leading them to miss elements of the study that are critical for an informed decision. Specifically, overly long and complicated ICFs have the potential to increase barriers to trial participation for patients with mild cognitive impairment, those who do not speak English as a first language or among those with lower medical literacy. In turn, this can influence trial recruitment, completion and external validity. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: SIMPLY-SNAP is a pragmatic, multicentre, open-label, two-arm parallel-group superiority RCT, nested within a larger trial, the ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the ethics review board (Sunnybrook Health Sciences Research Ethics Board) at sites in Ontario. We will disseminate study results via the SNAP trial group and other collaborating clinical trial networks. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT06168474; www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov).
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.