ArticleSAGE open medicine2024
A qualitative study on informed consent decision-making at two tertiary hospitals in Uganda: Experiences of patients undergoing emergency surgery and their next of kin.
Article in SAGE open medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consenting practices to enhance comprehension in research involving individuals with schizophrenia and bipolar affective disorder in Uganda: a qualitative inquiry.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Informed consent practices among emergency staff for patients undergoing emergency surgery in the emergency surgical units of two tertiary teaching hospitals in Uganda: a qualitative study.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Advancing Doctoral and Postdoctoral International Bioethics Training Programs Supported by the D43 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Fogarty Mechanism.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: In emergency situations, patients and their next of kin must make complex medical and ethical decisions in a quick and timely way. Objectives: To describe the decision-making process during informed consent for emergency surgery among patients and the next of kin of patients who have undergone emergency surgery. Methods: Consecutive sampling of 39 participants and in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted at two tertiary teaching hospitals in Uganda. There were 22 patients and 17 next of kin of patients who had undergone emergency surgery within 24-72 h. Responses about decision-making were coded into themes using the social constructivist theory and phenomenological approach. Results: There were four emergent themes; decision-makers, people consulted, documentation of the consent and factors influencing decision-making. Most patients and next of kin made decisions on their own and documented the consent for themselves. Other family members and doctors were consulted during the decision-making process. Decision-making was influenced by reassurance of good outcomes of surgery and disclosure by the doctors. Conclusion: Decisions were made collaboratively with the patient at the center but with input of health personnel, the next of kin and other family members. A communitarian approach combined with shared decision-making between the doctor and the patient and next of kin with adequate discussion and disclosure of information in simple language would improve decision-making for patients and their next of kin.
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.