ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2025
Emergency Verbal Consent for Intrapartum Research: A Grounded Theory Study.
Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Commentary: Multi-stage consent for time-sensitive clinical trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Article
- Exploring abbreviated intrapartum consent: A mixed-methods study of patient and clinician perspectives in the Baby head ElevAtion Device trial.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Article
- Informing Decision-Making About Caesarean Birth: A Delphi Study to Develop a Core Information Set.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 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
objectiveTo understand the experiences of women, birth partners and health professionals of verbal followed by retrospective written consent in a prospective cohort study of a device to manage postpartum haemorrhage (PPH).
designGrounded Theory.
settingTertiary facility in North-West England, UK. SAMPLE: We used purposive and theoretical sampling to recruit 51 participants; 12 women, 12 birth partners, 16 obstetricians and 11 midwives.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted, using a topic guide for focus, until data saturation was achieved. Data were analysed using framework analysis technique.
resultsMost women wanted sufficient information to make a decision at the time of the event, rather than in advance, and preferred not to be overwhelmed with detail. A key factor in making the decision to participate was a positive and trusting relationship with the attending obstetrician. Obtaining consent for research in emergencies was viewed by obstetricians as requiring a different approach and more challenging than consent for standard procedures in an emergency.
conclusionsThis is one of the first studies to explore verbal followed by retrospective written consent processes with women, clinicians and observers. This was acceptable to all, however information needs to be appropriate, and those discussing consent require adequate training (199/200).
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.