↓ Skip to main content

A didactic approach to presenting verbal and visual information to children participating in research protocols: the comic book informed assent

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A didactic approach to presenting verbal and visual information to children participating in research protocols: the comic book informed assent
Published in
Clinics, August 2018
DOI 10.6061/clinics/2018/e207
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thaís Massetti, Tânia Brusque Crocetta, Regiani Guarnieri, Talita Dias da Silva, Andrea Fernanda Leal, Mariana Callil Voos, Carlos Bandeira de Mello Monteiro

Abstract

When children participate in research protocols, consent (by a parent or legal guardian) and assent (by the children) must be given. Understanding research protocols can be challenging for an adult and even more difficult for a child. The aim of this study was to describe the development of a comic book created to facilitate children's understanding of informed assent with clear and simple language. Five researchers with scores above seven according to the Fehring criteria developed the comic book, avoiding the use of technical terminology. Twenty children between 7 and 12 years old, and enrolled in a larger study, responded using a Likert scale and questions about the clarity of texts and illustrations. The final version met National Health System Resolutions (Resoluções do Conselho Nacional da Saúde - CNS n° 196/1996 and 466/2012). The comic book assent presents a short story containing information about a real study: the invitation to participate, objectives, methods, instruments, procedures, risks, benefits, and the researchers' contact information. Most of the participants answered that they perceived the content of the text to be "Excellent" (40%) and "Very good" (40%), and the illustrations were perceived as "Excellent" (45%) and "Very good" (55%). The construction of a simple and clear model of informed assent is possible, and this model should be used in experiments with children.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Master 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Lecturer 4 6%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 23 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 26 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 April 2022.
All research outputs
#15,397,966
of 25,715,849 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#553
of 1,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,721
of 345,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#6
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,715,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,227 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 345,068 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 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 70% of its contemporaries.