Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39787574›Full record

ArticleThe journal of trauma and acute care surgery2025

Analysis of time to regulatory approval in an exception from informed consent trial in trauma patients.

Shannon W Stephens, Christy R Carroll-Ledbetter, Sarah Duckert, Tanner W Coffman, Margaret A Nelson, Joel Rodgers, Russell L Griffin, Sarah Grzyb, Amy Suen, Jeremy Casey and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of trauma and acute care surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Responses to Commentaries on "Ethics as if Your Life Depended on It".Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

20 authors.

Shannon W StephensFrom the Department of Surgery (S.W.S., C.R.C.-L., S.D., T.W.C., M.A.N., J.R., J.B.H., J.O.J.), Center for Injury Science, and Department of Epidemiology (R.L.G.), University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Avania Clinical (S.G.), Marlborough, Massachusetts; CSL Behring (A.S., J.C., S.R.S., B.G., J.R., J.D.), King of Prussia, Pennsylvania; Office of Institutional Review Board (A.J.M.), University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; Advarra (L.G., A.H.), Columbia, Maryland; and Department of Surgery (B.J.), University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.ORCID 0000-0001-5898-5170
Christy R Carroll-Ledbetter
Sarah Duckert
Tanner W Coffman
Margaret A Nelson
Joel Rodgers
Russell L Griffin
Sarah Grzyb
Amy Suen
Jeremy Casey
Steven R Sloan
Brahm Goldstein
Jay Richwood
Julia Delfs
Adam J McClintock
Luke Gelinas
Amanda Higley
Bellal Joseph
John B Holcomb
Jan O Jansen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe interactive media-based approach to community consultation and public disclosure (CC/PD), a key step when conducting exception from informed consent (EFIC) clinical trials, is intended to be completed in 4 months. This analysis characterizes the process, from initiation of CC/PD activities to institutional review board approval, to better understand the barriers and how these can be mitigated.

methodsThis is a retrospective post hoc analysis of data collected as part of the CC/PD campaigns conducted for a large trial involving up to 90 trauma centers in the United States. Each site was provided with templated materials that had been reviewed and approved by a central institutional review board (cIRB). We collected the dates of milestones, including the study "kickoff call," start of the social media campaign, dates of online community meetings, date of submission of site report to the cIRB, and cIRB approval date.

resultsSixty-two sites were cIRB approved at the time of this analysis. The median time from the kickoff call to the start of the social media campaign was 79 days, with an interquartile range of 33 to 126 days (range, 0-285 days). All social media campaigns ran for the prescribed period of at least 2 months. All sites conducted at least four online community meetings. The median number of days from the kickoff call to cIRB approval was 216 days (interquartile range, 168-281 days; range, 116-459 days). There was no significant difference between sites that had previous experience of EFIC trials.

conclusionUsing the interactive media-based approach, CC/PD can be completed quickly; however, there are barriers that can incur substantial delays. Greater harmonization of local administrative processes would shorten the time to conduct CC/PD activities and facilitate the timely commencement and execution of EFIC trials. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicEthics Committees, ResearchInformed ConsentWounds and InjuriesDisclosureHumansRetrospective StudiesSocial MediaTime FactorsTrauma CentersUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39787574
PMCPMC11902598

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.