Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Ethics in Research

Ethics in Research

Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.

Nurses' Legal Responsibilities I

Nurses' Legal Responsibilities I

In healthcare, informed consent is a crucial process that involves thoroughly communicating medical treatment options to patients, including benefits, risks, potential side effects, and alternatives. This process enables patients to make well-informed decisions about their care, ensuring they understand the implications of their choices before consenting to or refusing treatment.
The legal responsibilities of a nurse regarding informed consent include the following:

Conformity

Conformity

Conformity is the change in a person’s behavior to go along with the group, even if that person does not agree with the group.

Persuasion Strategies

Persuasion Strategies

Researchers have tested many persuasion strategies, including the foot-in-the door and the door-in-the-face techniques, in a variety of contexts. Ultimately, the principles are effective in selling products and changing people’s attitude, ideas, and behaviors (Cialdini & Goldstein, 2004).

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and Validity

Reliability and validity are two important considerations that must be made with any type of data collection. Reliability refers to the ability to consistently produce a given result. In the context of psychological research, this would mean that any instruments or tools used to collect data do so in consistent, reproducible ways.

The Scientific Method

The Scientific Method

Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

Coronary Sinus Lead Entrapment During Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Replacement: Implications for Pacing-Dependent Patients.

JACC. Case reports·2026

Same author

A novel bioenergetic model outlines the metabolism of a deep-sea clam and that of its sulfur-oxidizing symbionts.

Scientific reports·2026

Same author

Developing an Individualized Patient Decision Aid for Chronic Coronary Disease Based on the ISCHEMIA Trial: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes·2024

Same author

Restrictive Covenants and Noncompete Clauses for Physicians.

JACC. Advances·2024

Same author

Pacemaker syndrome: Thinking beyond atrioventricular dyssynchrony.

HeartRhythm case reports·2024

Same author

Association Between Mental Health Burden, Clinical Presentation, and Outcomes in Individuals With Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Circulation·2023

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 26, 2026

A Familiarization Protocol Facilitates the Participation of Children with ASD in Electrophysiological Research

A Familiarization Protocol Facilitates the Participation of Children with ASD in Electrophysiological Research

Published on: July 31, 2017

Implementing an innovative consent form: the PREDICT experience.

Carole Decker¹, Suzanne V Arnold, Olawale Olabiyi

¹Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, 4401 Wornall Rd, Kansas City, MO 64111, USA. c1decker@saint-lukes.org

Implementation Science : IS

|January 2, 2009

Summary

This summary is machine-generated.

Patient-specific risk estimates for coronary angiography improve consent processes. The PREDICT tool enhances communication, though informatics challenges exist. Further trials are needed to confirm clinical benefits.

More Related Videos

Online Explorative Study on the Learning Uses of Virtual Reality Among Early Adopters

Online Explorative Study on the Learning Uses of Virtual Reality Among Early Adopters

Published on: November 22, 2019

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 26, 2026

A Familiarization Protocol Facilitates the Participation of Children with ASD in Electrophysiological Research

A Familiarization Protocol Facilitates the Participation of Children with ASD in Electrophysiological Research

Published on: July 31, 2017

Online Explorative Study on the Learning Uses of Virtual Reality Among Early Adopters

Online Explorative Study on the Learning Uses of Virtual Reality Among Early Adopters

Published on: November 22, 2019

Area of Science:

Cardiology
Health Informatics
Patient Communication

Background:

Current coronary angiography consent forms offer limited patient-physician communication.
Clinicians lack easy access to risk models, leading to vague risk estimations for patients.

Purpose of the Study:

To develop and implement a web-based tool (PREDICT) for generating patient-specific risk estimates for coronary angiography consent.
To assess the implementation of PREDICT-enhanced consent documents in routine clinical care.

Main Methods:

Developed PREDICT, a web-based system embedding risk estimates into consent documents at the point-of-care.
Utilized qualitative research to evaluate implementation from administrative, IT, nursing, physician, and patient perspectives.
Piloted the system in a hospital setting starting August 2006, expanding in February 2007.

Main Results:

Clinicians found PREDICT useful for patient clarity and education, though some noted workflow delays.
Administrative and patient responses were positive.
Informatics presented the primary implementation barrier.

Conclusions:

Multidisciplinary collaboration can drive successful clinical process and culture change.
A randomized trial is recommended to evaluate PREDICT's impact on decision-making, compliance, and outcomes.