ArticleCureus2024
Standardized Informed Consent Form for Clinicians Administering Platelet-Rich Plasma.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction When it comes to medico-legal malpractice suits, lawyers and insurers tend to focus on informed consent documentation. Unfortunately, there is no standard protocol for obtaining informed consent for the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections, which might cause problems. This study aimed to mitigate this concern through the development of a standardized informed consent document for PRP injections, grounded in evidence-based practices. Materials and methods An examination of databases was conducted to explore the medico-legal ramifications associated with PRP injections, as well as the broader topic of informed consent, with a particular focus on the context of PRP injections. Moreover, interviews were carried out with healthcare providers and individuals who had received PRP injections within the preceding year, utilizing a semi-structured methodology. Results We developed an evidence-based informed consent document tailored for PRP injections. To guarantee its legal validity, the document underwent review by a legal specialist. Subsequently, our institutions implemented the finalized form for PRP injection procedures over one year. Conclusion A legally valid and evidence-based informed consent form for PRP injections would ensure patient's rights, and encourage open communication and transparency between them and the doctor. Moreover, if a lawsuit were to arise, it would serve as a critical document in the doctor's defense and withstand scrutiny from lawyers and the judiciary.
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.