ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2025
Towards a sensitive process of assent in pediatric clinical trials: a qualitative study on the patient perspective.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study explored how adolescents experience the assent process in pediatric clinical trials. It examined their perspectives on the clarity, relevance, and adequacy of assent materials and generated insights to inform the development of more effective tools that support meaningful participation in research decision-making. A qualitative constructivist design was employed with participants from the KIDS Madrid Young People Advisory Group. The sample included 11 adolescents aged 15-19 years, 70% with prior hospital experience and 30% without. Data were collected through two semi-structured focus groups of 80 min each, moderated by trained facilitators. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis, beginning with open coding to identify themes, followed by clustering and refinement through researcher triangulation. The analysis revealed five themes shaping adolescents' views on assent: communication, adherence, format, quality of life impact, and decision-making. Communication was the most salient and recurrent theme to the study's contribution, with clarity, empathy, and trusted professionals fostering confidence and dialogue. Respectful and informative interactions enhanced adherence, often linked to altruism. Participants criticized lengthy, technical documents and favored youth-friendly formats such as videos or graphics. They also stressed the need for transparency about daily life disruptions and valued being involved in decisions, which reinforced confidence and a sense of partnership in care.
conclusionsThis study shows that treating assent as a meaningful process improves adolescents' engagement and adherence. Clear, empathetic, age-appropriate communication helps them feel respected and empowered, while trust, emotional safety, and autonomy are key to adapting communication to their needs. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Pediatric patients are often legally unable to provide informed consent; still, obtaining informed assent constitutes an ethical imperative. • Obtaining informed assent may be especially challenging, as complex health-related information must be conveyed in an age-appropriate manner. WHAT IS NEW: • This study sought to gain insight into the process of informed assent in clinical trials by focusing on the perspective of patients. • Potential challenges interfering with the process of informed assent may be overcome by strengthening communication between health practitioners and patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41238798What 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.