Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41696529›Full record

ArticleResuscitation plus2026

Attitudes of patients and family members towards deferred and waived consent in ECPR research, an ancillary study of the INCEPTION trial.

Stijn E D M Eussen, Anina F van de Koolwijk, Thijs S R Delnoij, Martje M Suverein, Brigitte A B Essers, Renicus C Hermanides, Luuk C Otterspoor, Carlos V Elzo Kraemer, Alexander P J Vlaar, Joris J van der Heijden and 11 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Resuscitation plus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03101787 (Early Initiation of Extracorporeal Life Support in Refractory OHCA), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

NCT03101787 nacompletednot on this map

Early Initiation of Extracorporeal Life Support in Refractory OHCA (INCEPTION)

TypeinterventionalSponsorMaastricht University Medical CenterRan2017 to 2022Enrolled134ConditionsCardiac Arrest, Out-Of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest, Sudden Cardiac DeathArmsExtracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

21 authors.

Stijn E D M EussenDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Anina F van de KoolwijkDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Thijs S R DelnoijDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Martje M SuvereinDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Brigitte A B EssersDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technical Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Renicus C HermanidesDepartment of Cardiology, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, the Netherlands.
Luuk C OtterspoorDepartment of Intensive Care, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Carlos V Elzo KraemerDepartment of Intensive Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Alexander P J VlaarDepartment of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Joris J van der HeijdenDepartment of Intensive Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Erik ScholtenDepartment of Intensive Care, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
Corstiaan A den UilDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Dinis Dos Reis MiradaDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Sakir AkinDepartment of Intensive Care, Haga Hospital, The Hague, the Netherlands.
Jesse de MetzDepartment of Intensive Care, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Iwan van der HorstCardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Bjorn WinkensDepartment of Methodology & Statistics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Jos G MaessenDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Roberto LorussoDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Marcel C G van de PollDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
INCEPTION-investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In emergency settings, obtaining timely informed consent is not always feasible, making deferred and waived consent a potential solution. Despite its frequent use in high-risk research, the experiences and opinions of patients and (bereaved) relatives have been scarcely investigated. This study examined their attitudes towards enrolment in the INCEPTION-trial (NCT03101787) on extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR). Methods: Questionnaires were sent to survivors and (bereaved) relatives who had signed consent forms for follow-up research in the initial INCEPTION-trial. Additionally, relatives where consent was waived were contacted through their general practitioner with a request to participate. Responses included Likert-scale and free-text data, were analysed using descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests. Results: A total of 32 of 38 (overall response rate 84.2%) sent questionnaires were returned, from 9 survivors, 9 corresponding relatives of these survivors, 6 relatives of non-survivors who provided proxy consent and 8 relatives of non-survivors whose consent was waived. 81.3% of the respondents (strongly) supported alternative consent procedures. No statistically significant differences were found between survivors and non-survivors or ECPR versus conventional cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CCPR). The need for, and challenges of research in an emergency setting were acknowledged. Aftercare contact improved understanding of the trial and helped in bereavement processing. Conclusions: Overall, patients and (bereaved) relatives had a positive attitude towards waived and deferred consent procedures in high-risk, high-mortality research in the emergency setting. Information provision at a later stage, once the emotional burden has eased, is appreciated.

Indexed as

EthicsExtracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitationInformed consentOut-of-hospital cardiac arrest

Identifiers

PMID41696529
PMCPMC12906210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.