ArticleThe journal of trauma and acute care surgery2025
Analysis of time to regulatory approval in an exception from informed consent trial in trauma patients.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Responses to Commentaries on "Ethics as if Your Life Depended on It".Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2026Article
- Community consultation and public disclosure for the Randomized Trial of Sedative Choice for Intubation.Trials · 2026Article
- Social and demographic predictors of willingness to participate in an exception from informed consent trial.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Community Consultation and Public Disclosure for the Randomized Trial of Sedative Choice for Intubation.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Community consultation for exception from informed consent studies: are market research surveys representative of the target community populations?Trauma surgery & acute care open · 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.