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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cluster randomized trial assessing the effects of rapid ethical assessment on informed consent comprehension in a low-resource setting
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Ethics, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12910-016-0127-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adamu Addissie, Serebe Abay, Yeweyenhareg Feleke, Melanie Newport, Bobbie Farsides, Gail Davey |
| Abstract |
Maximizing comprehension is a major challenge for informed consent processes in low-literacy and resource-limited settings. Application of rapid qualitative assessments to improve the informed consent process is increasingly considered useful. This study assessed the effects of Rapid Ethical Assessment (REA) on comprehension, retention and quality of the informed consent process. A cluster randomized trial was conducted among participants of HPV sero-prevalence study in two districts of Northern Ethiopia, in 2013. A total of 300 study participants, 150 in the intervention and 150 in the control group, were included in the study. For the intervention group, the informed consent process was designed with further revisions based on REA findings. Informed consent comprehension levels and quality of the consent process were measured using the Modular Informed Consent Comprehension Assessment (MICCA) and Quality of Informed Consent (QuIC) process assessment tools, respectively. Study recruitment rates were 88.7 % and 80.7 % (p = 0.05), while study retention rates were 85.7 % and 70.3 % (p < 0.005) for the intervention and control groups respectively. Overall, the mean informed consent comprehension scores for the intervention and control groups were 73.1 % and 45.2 %, respectively, with a mean difference in comprehension score of 27.9 % (95 % CI 24.0 % - 33.4 %; p < 0.001,). Mean scores for quality of informed consent for the intervention and control groups were 89.1 % and 78.5 %, respectively, with a mean difference of 10.5 % (95 % CI 6.8 -14.2 %; p < 0.001). Levels of informed consent comprehension, quality of the consent process, study recruitment and retention rates were significantly improved in the intervention group. We recommend REA as a potential modality to improve informed consent comprehension and quality of informed consent process in low resource settings. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 73 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 21% |
| Researcher | 13 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 19 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 22 | 30% |
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 31 March 2023.
All research outputs
#13,867,951
of 23,505,064 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Ethics
#719
of 1,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,073
of 356,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Ethics
#13
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,505,064 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 356,619 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.