Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40225794›Full record

ArticleAsian bioethics review2025

Reimagining Assent: When Things Get Lost in Translation in International Pediatric Research.

Sarosh Saleem

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian bioethics review, 2025. 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

1 author.

Sarosh SaleemDepartment of Health Care Ethics, Albert Gnaegi Center for Health Care Ethics, Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, MO USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4732-3686

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The necessity of obtaining pediatric assent for research participation is well established within international ethical guidelines. However, the effective implementation of these guidelines poses significant challenges for research ethics committees in numerous developing countries, such as Pakistan, characterized by diverse cultural and socio-economic contexts. This paper critically examines the moral underpinnings of assent, rooted in the principle of respect for persons, which aims to empower, engage, and educate children involved in research processes. Through a case example, this paper reveals the unique obstacles faced by researchers and clinicians in Pakistan, which stem from socio-cultural norms and economic disparities. Such challenges endanger the ethical foundation of assent, creating a disconnect between its philosophical basis and practical execution. Although international guidelines permit contextual adaptation of assent procedures, such flexibility is not adequately articulated within the guidelines, nor is it typically prioritized in practice. This gap undermines the purpose of assent and inadvertently increases the risk of harm to child participants-not from the research itself but rather from a process designed to protect and empower them. This paper emphasizes greater awareness among stakeholders regarding these challenges, urging a reimagined assent process in diverse global contexts. By introducing a clear rationale within research guidelines, the intent is to ensure that researchers and Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) prioritize the contextual understanding of assent, transforming it from a mere procedural formality into a meaningful practice that mitigates potential risks to children and adolescents involved in research.

Indexed as

AssentCultural sensitivityDissentEthical guidelinesInstitutional Review BoardsPediatric research

Identifiers

PMID40225794
PMCPMC11981973

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.