Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Nurses' Legal Responsibilities I01:27

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:
Legal Guidelines for Documentation01:06

Legal Guidelines for Documentation

The legal guidelines for nursing documentation are essential for ensuring accurate, professional, and ethical recording of patient care. The guidelines are discussed here:
Methods of Documentation III: PIE01:21

Methods of Documentation III: PIE

Problem-intervention-evaluation (PIE) is a systematic approach to documentation used in healthcare settings for clinical decision-making and patient care planning. It is a structured approach to organizing patient data based on problems, interventions, and evaluations. Here's a breakdown of its key features and considerations:
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can have a...
Decision Making01:20

Decision Making

Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Real-world implementation of clinical decision support systems in emergency departments: a scoping review protocol.

JBI evidence synthesis·2026
Same author

Every Six-Month versus Single-Dose Adjuvant Zoledronate in Early Breast Cancer.

NEJM evidence·2026
Same author

Barriers to Leveraging Patient Safety Event Reviews for Organizational Learning, Improvement, and Diagnostic Error Reduction: Results of a Single Academic Center Survey Study.

Journal of general internal medicine·2026
Same author

From Insights to Action: Enhancing Clinical Research at The Ottawa Hospital through a Mixed-Methods Improvement Project.

Healthcare management forum·2026
Same author

Measuring and monitoring safety of older adults living in retirement homes: a scoping review protocol.

BMJ open·2025
Same author

Pooled Efficacy and Exploration of Effect Modifiers of Exercise Prehabilitation: A Systematic Review and Meta-regression Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Anesthesia and analgesia·2025
Same journal

Many multicenter randomized controlled trials do not account for center effect: a methodological review.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Patient Acceptability of the Modified Zelen Approach to Randomized Trials - A Survey of the CAPS THA Cohort.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Corrigendum to SPICE-GRADE: simultaneous processing of indirect causal evidence in complex pathways using GRADE - an exploratory case study. [Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 194C (2026) 112219].

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Small numbers of clusters in cluster randomised trials: a scoping review of problems and proposed solutions.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

What's the Meta Now? More Updates on the Problems with Systematic Reviews.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

A scoping review of guidance on sharing trial results with patients and the public finds inconsistent recommendations and limited methodological development.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 22, 2026

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research
07:48

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research

Published on: November 26, 2015

Informed consent documents do not encourage good-quality decision making.

Jamie C Brehaut1, Kelly Carroll, Glyn Elwyn

  • 1Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, The Ottawa Hospital, General Campus, 501 Smyth Road, Centre for Practice-Changing Research, Box 201B, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1H 8L6. jbrehaut@ohri.ca

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
|April 28, 2012
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Informed consent documents (ICDs) for research trials often fail to support patients in making difficult decisions. Most ICDs do not meet validated standards for decision-making support, impacting participant understanding.

More Related Videos

A Familiarization Protocol Facilitates the Participation of Children with ASD in Electrophysiological Research
08:42

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

Published on: July 31, 2017

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 22, 2026

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research
07:48

Working with Human Tissues for Translational Cancer Research

Published on: November 26, 2015

A Familiarization Protocol Facilitates the Participation of Children with ASD in Electrophysiological Research
08:42

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

Published on: July 31, 2017

Area of Science:

  • Clinical Research Ethics
  • Patient Decision Making
  • Health Literacy

Background:

  • Informed consent documents (ICDs) in research prioritize information delivery over decision-making support.
  • There is a need to evaluate ICDs against established standards for patient decision aids.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the conformity of existing informed consent documents (ICDs) with the International Patient Decision Aid Standards.
  • To identify areas where ICDs fall short in supporting research participants' decision-making processes.

Main Methods:

  • One hundred thirty-nine ICDs from ClinicalTrials.gov were evaluated by two independent raters.
  • A 32-item checklist based on International Patient Decision Aid Standards was used for assessment.

Main Results:

  • Conformity with information provision standards was inconsistent, with high failure rates for presenting outcome probabilities and clarifying values.
  • Structured guidance and evidence utilization items showed very low conformity.
  • Transparency items demonstrated higher conformity, with two items exceeding 80%.

Conclusions:

  • Existing ICDs largely fail to meet validated standards for effective decision-making support.
  • Improvements in ICDs are needed to ensure research participants are adequately informed and supported in their decisions.