ArticlePLOS digital health2024
On-site electronic consent in pediatrics using generic Informed Consent Service (gICS): Creating a specialized setup and collecting consent data.
Article in PLOS digital health, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enrolling in a clinical trial or study requires informed consent. Furthermore, it is crucial to ensure proper consent when storing samples in biobanks for future research, as these samples may be used in studies beyond their initial purpose. For pediatric studies, consent must be obtained from both the child and their legal guardians, requiring the recording of multiple consents at once. Electronic consent has become more popular recently due to its ability to prevent errors and simplify the documentation of multiple consents. However, integrating consent capture into existing study software structures remains a challenge. This report evaluates the usability of the generic Informed Consent Service (gICS) of the University Medicine Greifswald (UMG) for obtaining electronic consent in pediatric studies. The setup was designed to integrate seamlessly with the current infrastructure and meet the specific needs of a multi-user, multi-study environment. The study was conducted in a pediatric research setting, where additional informed consent was obtained separately for the biobank. Over a period of 54 weeks, 1061 children and adolescents aged 3 to 17 years participated in the study. Out of these, 348 agreed also to participate in the biobank. The analysis included a total of 2066 consents and assents, with 945 paper-based and 1121 electronic consents. The study assessed the error susceptibility of electronic versus paper-based consents and found a significant reduction rate of errors of 94.7%. These findings provide valuable insights into the use of gICS in various studies and the practical implementation of electronic consent software in pediatric medicine.
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.