ArticleCureus2026
Transitioning to Digital: A Single-Center Experience of Electronic Consent Implementation in General Surgery at a UK District General Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInformed consent is an ethical and legal prerequisite for surgical intervention. In the United Kingdom, the Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board ruling shifted the standard toward a patient-centered model, necessitating a personalized discussion of "material risks". Traditional paper-based consent is often hampered by poor legibility and loss of physical records. This study evaluates a pilot electronic consent (e-consent) system in a general surgery department through clinician feedback.
methodsA retrospective cross-sectional survey was conducted among 16 clinicians at Basildon University Hospital following the completion of a pilot phase for e-consent in appendicectomy and abscess procedures. Data on efficiency, hardware reliability, and compliance with Montgomery standards were collected via Likert-scale (1-5) responses.
resultsClinicians reported that e-consent was faster than paper (mean 4.06/5) and intuitive to navigate (mean 4.13/5). Notably, clinicians reported high confidence in meeting Montgomery standards (mean 4.19/5). However, hardware availability (mean 3.25/5) and software reliability (mean 3.50/5) were identified as primary barriers. Despite these hurdles, 81.25% of participants preferred e-consent over traditional methods for future use.
conclusionE-consent improves the standardization and legal robustness of the consenting process. Institutional investment in hardware infrastructure is essential for sustainable hospital-wide adoption.
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.