Advertisement
Table 2 Studies reporting public opinion of research without consent – Aspects of study design
| Author | Country | Study design | Sample | No of subjects | Scenarios/hypothetical studies | Measurements |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smithline & Gerstle (1998) [29] | US | Interview survey | Emergency Dept pts | 204 | Patient had serious illness | Agree/disagree |
| 1. Study intervention with minimal absolute risk | ||||||
| 2. Study intervention with greater than minimal absolute risk | ||||||
| McClure et al (2003) [31] | US | Interview survey | Emergency Dept pts & visitors | 530 | 1. Study intervention with minimal absolute risk | 5-point Likert scale |
| 2. Study intervention with greater than minimal absolute risk | ||||||
| Two study scenarios: | ||||||
| 1. New therapies for serious bleeding | ||||||
| 2. Efficacy of public access to defibrillation | ||||||
| Abboud et al (2006) [32] | US | Interview survey | Emergency Dept pts | 207 | Patient in cardiac arrest | |
| Geriatric Clinic pts | 213 | Two surgical procedures: | ||||
| 1. Less invasive, intravenous line (minimal risk) | 4-point Likert scale | |||||
| 2. More invasive, thoracotomy (>minimal risk) | ||||||
| New experimental medicine in three study designs: | ||||||
| 1. Outside of a study protocol; | ||||||
| 2. Part of a study protocol; | ||||||
| 3. In a randomised controlled trial | ||||||
| Goldstein et al (2007). [33] | US | Interview survey | Emergency Dept pts | 473 | Patient suffered cardiac arrest or stroke | Not stated |
| Triner et al (2007) [34] | US | Interview survey | Emergency Dept pts & visitors | 497 | General description of waiver of and exception from informed consent studies | 5-point Likert scale |
| Booth et al (2005) [30] | UK | Self-completion questionnaire | Out-patients | 362 | Patient suffered heart attack, stroke or head injury | Yes/No/Don't know |
| 1. Study intervention with minimal risk | ||||||
| 2. Study intervention with moderate risk |
