ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2025
Attitudes and Experiences With Informed Consent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Korea: A Mixed-Methods Study.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is one of the most popular invasive cardiovascular procedures performed worldwide. However, patients often overestimate its benefits or underestimate potential risks, which should be addressed during informed consent (IC). In light of this, our study aimed to explore in greater depth the attitudes and experiences with IC regarding PCI in South Korea.
methodsThis mixed-methods study employed a sequential design following the guidelines of the Mixed Methods Reporting in Rehabilitation and Health Sciences. Between December 2022 and January 2023, a cross-sectional survey was completed by 255 patients and 136 physicians. From February to April 2023, in-depth interviews were conducted with 13 physicians were conducted and analyzed using conventional content analysis.
resultsPatients and physicians showed a significant difference in agreement with the purpose of IC with respect to the right to self-determination (
conclusionPatients should first be educated on the purpose of IC to prepare them for receiving detailed information about PCI. When they are ready to accept information, strategies suggested by several studies may be applied to improve their understanding. This step-by-step provision of information will elevate patient compliance with IC.
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.