ArticleBMC medical ethics2025
Implementing and evaluating visual key information pages compared to text-based key information: protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06804837 (Implement and Test Visual Consent Template and Process), which is not on this 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.
Implement and Test Visual Consent Template and Process
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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInformed consent is a key aspect of conducting research studies, yet many participants do not understand critical study details after reviewing long, complex consent documents. The 2018 Common Rule aimed to address this challenge by requiring a key information section, a "concise and focused" presentation of important and relevant study information. In our ongoing work, we developed a template and toolkit to improve the presentation of key information by incorporating health literacy best practices, including color and visual icons. The goal of this study is to assess the impact of the visual key information (KI) pages at both the research coordinator and participant level.
methodsWe will conduct a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial across three academic centers in the USA. We will randomize twelve research coordinators to six intervention sequences to use either usual care materials or the visual KI page when enrolling participants eligible for their independent research trials. Primary outcomes will be assessed at the research coordinator level and include organizational willingness and readiness to adopt the visual KI intervention and the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention. Changes in these outcomes will be compared before implementation (baseline) and after implementation (post-recruitment). Secondary outcomes will be assessed at the participant level and include knowledge of study information, satisfaction with consent information, decisional conflict about joining the trial, and trial enrollment. We will use a two-sided Wilcoxon signed-rank test to compare the difference in primary outcomes. We will use multivariable linear regression models to investigate the effect of the consent intervention on the secondary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This study will evaluate the implementation of an intervention designed to improve informed consent processes using a visual KI page. Establishing the effectiveness of visual KI pages will allow for broader dissemination to the research community and sustained use over time.
trial registrationThe trial is registered on clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier NCT06804837. Registered on January 27, 2025.
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.