ArticleBMC medical ethics2025
Exploring knowledge and attitudes toward electronic informed consent among clinical trial participants in China: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Ethical and Regulatory Awareness of Clinical Trials: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study from Poland.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWith the extensive integration of digital technology into clinical research, intelligence, virtualization, and decentralization have gradually transformed into emerging clinical research modes, the electronization of informed consent has become indispensable to the development of clinical trial informatization, and the inclination to use electronic informed consent (eIC) has grown. The knowledge and perceptions of research participants, as objects of informed consent acquisition, regarding eIC are crucial. However, few studies have empirically explored such issues.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted at three general hospitals in south-central China from July to September 2022. An online survey questionnaire was adapted and administered via WeChat to investigate the issues of interest.
resultsA total of 388 valid questionnaires were included in the analysis. The results showed that the overall response rate for the knowledge section of the questionnaire exceeded 70%. Of the respondents, 53.1% had heard of the term "electronic informed consent," but only 43.2% had used eIC. The majority of respondents (68%) expressed a preference for using eIC and demonstrated a positive attitude toward it. However, some participants expressed concerns regarding the security and confidentiality (64.4%), operational complexity (52.3%), and effectiveness of online interaction (59.3%) in eIC. Statistically significant relationships were observed between participants' attitude scores and their age, gender, type of participation, and frequency of involvement in clinical research. Additionally, a positive and statistically significant correlation was found between participants' knowledge scores and their attitude scores.
conclusionThe results of this study indicate that most participants have a good understanding of eIC-related knowledge and hold a positive attitude toward its implementation. However, they also express concerns about data protection and privacy security in eIC. These findings provide a foundation for developing targeted strategies to enhance the adoption and acceptance of eIC among diverse populations.
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.