There are gaps in the existing evidence base about assent, with conflicting and unhelpful views prevalent. We contend that appropriate assent is a valuable process that has important consequences for children's/young people's participation in research. Furthermore, there is a need for a model to support researchers in making decisions about who to assent and how to do this is a meaningful way.
We undertook a scoping review of the literature to assess the body of opinion on assent in research with children/young people. An anonymous online survey was conducted to gather views from the wider community undertaking research with children/young people. We also sought to gather examples of current and effective practice that could be shared beyond the level of a single institution and our own experience. Survey participants included 48 health professionals with varied levels of experience, all actively involved in research with children.
Published work, the findings from the online survey and our knowledge as experienced researchers in the field have confirmed four domains that should be considered in order for assent to be meaningful and individualized: child-related factors, family dynamics, study design and complexity and researcher and organizational factors. Mapping these domains onto the three paradigm cases for decision-making around children and young people's assent/consent as recommended by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics has resulted in a model that will aid researchers in understanding the relationship between assent and consent and help them make decisions about when assent is appropriate.
The debate about assent needs to move away from terminology, definition and legal issues. It should focus instead on practical ways of supporting researchers to work in partnership with children, thus ensuring a more informed, voluntary and more robust and longer lasting commitment to research.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 October 2022.
All research outputs
#10,519,450
of 34,359,530 outputs
Outputs from Child: Care, Health & Development
#730
of 1,906 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,312
of 336,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child: Care, Health & Development
#9
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,359,530 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,906 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 336,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
