Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Studies reporting public opinion of research without consent – Findings

From: Clinical research without consent in adults in the emergency setting: a review of patient and public views

Author Sample No of subjects % agreed with RWC % would personally be enrolled without consent Factors measured
     risk not specified minimal risk research > minimal risk research associated with attitude to RWC not associated
Smithline & Gerstle (1998) [29] Emergency Dept pts 204 - - 73 50 Educational status and certain aspects of health status Age, race, gender, perception of current acute illness.
McClure et al (2003) [31] Emergency Dept pts & visitors 500+ 34 70 75 50 Race Gender, religion, education, insurance status, knowledge of resuscitation medicine.
Abboud et al (2006) [32] Emergency Dept pts 207 - 70 88 77 Study design, invasiveness of intervention, patient group Age, race; marital status, living situation, religion, church attendance, education, having an advance directive
  Geriatric Clinic pts 213   48 63 48 Geriatric clinic patients only – gender and health status  
Goldstein et al (2007). [33] Emergency Dept pts 473 51 57 - -   Age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, insurance status, religion, confidence in current therapies & knowledge of requirements for RWC studies
Triner et al (2007) [34] Emergency Dept pts & visitors 497 42 50 - - Age, Gender, ethnicity Marital status, education.
Booth et al (2005) 12 Out-patients 362 84 - 92 67 None reported None reported
  1. not measured