Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40765530›Full record

ArticleCurrent urology2025

Patient consent in the modern era: Novel tools and practical considerations in urology.

Elisha Ogbodo, Ali Talyshinskii, Christian Arvei Moen, Esteban Emiliani, Bhaskar Kumar Somani, Lazaros Tzelves, Christian Beisland, Patrick Juliebø-Jones

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

8 authors.

Elisha OgbodoDepartment of Urology, Royal Preston Hospital, UK.
Ali TalyshinskiiDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Astana Medical University, Astana, Kazakhstan.
Christian Arvei MoenDepartment of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Esteban EmilianiDepartment of Urology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Bhaskar Kumar SomaniDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Southampton, UK.
Lazaros TzelvesDepartment of Urology, Sismanogleio Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Christian BeislandDepartment of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Patrick Juliebø-JonesDepartment of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Informed consent is a cornerstone of ethically acceptable surgical interventions. Traditional methods primarily rely on verbal explanations by clinicians and, at times, the use of supplementary resources such as information leaflets. In the modern era, novel tools have emerged to facilitate and enhance the consent process. Examples include multimedia, 3D models, virtual and augmented reality, quick response codes, and artificial intelligence technologies such as large language models. This narrative review provides an overview of these aids, discussing their potential advantages and limitations. In addition, the influence of social media on the consent process is explored.

Indexed as

ConsentSocial mediaSurgeryUrology

Identifiers

PMID40765530
PMCPMC12321481

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.