↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of consent models as an ethical consideration in the conduct of prehospital ambulance randomised controlled clinical trials: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
33 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of consent models as an ethical consideration in the conduct of prehospital ambulance randomised controlled clinical trials: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12874-017-0423-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie Armstrong, Adele Langlois, Despina Laparidou, Mark Dixon, Jason P. Appleton, Philip M. Bath, Helen Snooks, A. Niroshan Siriwardena

Abstract

We sought to understand the main ethical considerations when conducting clinical trials in the prehospital ambulance based setting. A systematic review of the literature on randomised controlled trials in ambulance settings was undertaken. A search of eight databases identified published studies involving recruitment of ambulance service users. Four independent authors undertook abstract and full-text reviews to determine eligibility and extract relevant data. The data extraction concentrated on ethical considerations, with any discussion of ethics being included for further analysis. The resultant data were combined to form a narrative synthesis. In all, 56 papers were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Issues relating to consent were the most significant theme identified. Type of consent differed depending on the condition or intervention being studied. The country in which the research took place did not appear to influence the type of consent, apart from the USA where exception from consent appeared to be most commonly used. A wide range of terms were used to describe consent. Consent was the main ethical consideration in published ambulance based research. A range of consent models were used ranging from informed consent to exception from consent (waiver of consent). Many studies cited international guidelines as informing their choice of consent model but diverse and sometimes confused terms were used to describe these models. This suggests that standardisation of consent models and the terminology used to describe them is warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Professor 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 13 24%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 18%
Philosophy 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 17 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2018.
All research outputs
#1,498,809
of 25,077,376 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#177
of 2,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,056
of 294,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#4
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,077,376 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,236 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.