rss
BMJ Open 5: doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008522
  • Paediatrics
    • Research

How parents and practitioners experience research without prior consent (deferred consent) for emergency research involving children with life threatening conditions: a mixed method study

Table 2

Parents’ survey responses regarding the CATCH consent process (n=275)

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree p Value
Statement 1: I was satisfied with the consent process for CATCH
 Emergency 74 (47.4) 71 (45.5) 11 (7.1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0.09
 Elective 68 (58.1) 46 (36.3) 3 (2.6) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Statement 2: I had enough time to think about whether or not to consent for my child to take part in CATCH
 Emergency 81 (51.6) 65 (41.4) 6 (3.8) 4 (2.5) 1 (0.6 0.98
 Elective 58 (49.2) 50 (42.4) 6 (5.1) 3 (5.1) 1 (0.8)
Statement 3: I made this decision
 Emergency 105 (67.7) 38 (24.5) 10 (6.5) 1 (0.6) 1 (0.6) 0.17
 Elective 70 (59.3) 42 (35.6) 3 (2.5) 1 (0.8) 2 (1.7)
Statement 4: The decision about research was inappropriately influenced by others
 Emergency 1 (0.6) 2 (1.3) 7 (4.5) 33 (21.0) 114 (72.6) 0.75
 Elective 0 (0) 2 (1.7) 3 (2.6) 21 (18.3) 89 (77.4)
Statement 5: I understood the information that I received from the doctor/research nurse about CATCH
 Emergency 94 (59.9) 59 (37.6) 2 (1.3) 1 (0.6) 1 (0.6) 0.74
 Elective 67 (56.8) 49 (41.5) 2 (1.7) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Statement 6: I had enough opportunity for questions about CATCH
 Emergency 91 (58.3) 56 (35.9) 6 (3.8) 2 (1.3) 1 (0.6) 0.87
 Elective 68 (57.6) 45 (38.1) 3 (2.5) 2 (1.7) 0 (0)
  • Figures are given as n (%); Missing responses: Statement 1:1 emergency and 1 elective; Statement 3:2 emergency; Statement 4:3 elective; Statement 6:1 emergency.

  • CATCH, CATheter infections in Children.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts to receive selected information relevant to your specialty interests and be the first to know when the latest research is published.

Navigate This Article

You are viewing from:
University of Liverpool Library

Remember me.