Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38991670›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation clinical trial evaluating video-assisted electronic consent vs standard consent for patients initiating and continuing haemodialysis in Australia (eConsent HD).

Pedro Henrique Franca Gois, Rebecca B Saunderson, Marina Wainstein, Chenlei Kelly Li, Matthew J Damasiewicz, Vera Y Miao, Martin Wolley, Kirsten Hepburn, Clyson Mutatiri, Bobby Chacko and 2 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Pedro Henrique Franca GoisJohn Hunter Hospital, New Lambton Heights, New South Wales, Australia pedro.francagois@health.nsw.gov.au.ORCID 0000-0002-3520-3225
Rebecca B SaundersonThe University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Marina WainsteinThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Chenlei Kelly LiDepartment of Renal Medicine, Saint George Hospital, Kogarah, New South Wales, Australia.
Matthew J DamasiewiczMonash Medical Centre, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Vera Y MiaoThe University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Martin WolleyThe University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Kirsten HepburnMetro North Hospital and Health Service, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Clyson MutatiriRenal Medicine, Wide Bay Hospital and Health Service, Bundaberg, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3033-2842
Bobby ChackoJohn Hunter Hospital, New Lambton Heights, New South Wales, Australia.
Ann Bonner *Nursing, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9920-6743
Helen Healy *The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCommunicating complex information about haemodialysis (HD) and ensuring it is well understood remains a challenge for clinicians. Informed consent is a high-impact checkpoint in augmenting patients' decision awareness and engagement prior to HD. The aims of this study are to (1) develop a digital information interface to better equip patients in the decision-making process to undergo HD; (2) evaluate the effectiveness of the co-designed digital information interface to improve patient outcomes; and (3) evaluate an implementation strategy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: First, a co-design process involving consumers and clinicians to develop audio-visual content for an innovative digital platform. Next a two-armed, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial will compare the digital interface to the current informed consent practice among adult HD patients (n=244). Participants will be randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group. Intervention group: Participants will be coached to an online platform that delivers a simple-to-understand animation and knowledge test questions prior to signing an electronic consent form. CONTROL GROUP: Participants will be consented conventionally by a clinician and sign a paper consent form. Primary outcome is decision regret, with secondary outcomes including patient-reported experience, comprehension, anxiety, satisfaction, adherence to renal care, dialysis withdrawal, consent time and qualitative feedback. Implementation of eConsent for HD will be evaluated concurrently using the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) methodology. ANALYSIS: For the randomised controlled trial, data will be analysed using intention-to-treat statistical methods. Descriptive statistics and CFIR-based analyses will inform implementation evaluation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human Research Ethics approval has been secured (Metro North Health Human Research Ethics Committee B, HREC/2022/MNHB/86890), and Dissemination will occur through partnerships with stakeholder and consumer groups, scientific meetings, publications and social media releases. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12622001354774).

Indexed as

Informed ConsentRenal DialysisAdultAustraliaDecision MakingHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVideo RecordingClinical TrialDialysisNEPHROLOGYPatient ParticipationPatient Satisfaction

Identifiers

PMID38991670
PMCPMC11243118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.