Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 1, 2026

E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
Deferred Consent for Randomized Controlled Trials in Emergency Care Settings
Katie Harron1, Kerry Woolfall2, Kerry Dwan2
1Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, England;
Insights
Deferred consent in pediatric intensive care trials achieved 72% consent rates. This method, while effective, risks bias by excluding critically ill children, necessitating careful ethical consideration.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric critical care research
- Clinical trial methodology
- Informed consent ethics
Background:
- Deferred consent for pediatric studies was legalized in the UK in 2008.
- Limited experience exists with deferred consent in pediatric research.
- The CATCH trial evaluated consent rates in pediatric intensive care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess consent rates and reasons for nonconsent in a pediatric intensive care randomized controlled trial using deferred consent.
- To inform future research designs involving emergency pediatric studies.
Main Methods:
- The CATCH trial randomized eligible children in 14 pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) to different central venous catheters.
- For emergency admissions, deferred consent was sought after initial treatment and stabilization.
- Data and blood samples were collected before consent was obtained.
Main Results:
- Consent was obtained for 72% (984/1358) of emergency admissions.
- Reasons for nonconsent included early discharge, transfer, and difficulties with consent for deceased children.
- Nonconsented patients had higher mortality (18%) compared to consented patients (9%).
- Deferred consent for emergency admissions (84%) was higher than prospective consent for elective admissions (69%).
Conclusions:
- Emergency trial designs must balance consent burden with the risk of bias from excluding vulnerable children.
- Ethics committees should consider approving the use of existing data when deferred consent is challenging.
- Optimizing consent processes in pediatric critical care is crucial for reducing bias and ensuring representation.
Background:
There is limited experience in using deferred consent for studies involving children, which was legalized in the United Kingdom in 2008. We aimed to inform future studies by evaluating consent rates and reasons for nonconsent in a large randomized controlled trial in pediatric intensive care.
Methods:
In the CATCH trial, eligible children from 14 PICUs in England and Wales were randomly assigned to 3 types of central venous catheters. To avoid delay in treatment, children admitted on an emergency basis were first randomly assigned to a trial central venous catheter, and we deferred seeking consent to use already collected data and blood samples until after stabilization.
Results:
Consent was obtained for 984/1358 (72%) of children admitted on an emergency basis. Failure to obtain consent resulted mainly from a lack of opportunity (early discharge or transfer) for survivors and difficulties in seeking consent for children who died. For admissions where there was an opportunity to approach (n = 1298), inclusion rates differed according to survival status: 93/984 (9%) of consented patients died, compared with 58/314 (18%) of nonconsented patients. For children admitted on an emergency basis whose families were approached, 984/1178 (84%) provided deferred consent (n = 15 sites), compared with 441/641 (69%) of children admitted on an elective basis who were approached for prospective consent (n = 9 sites).
Conclusions:
Design of emergency randomized controlled trials should balance the potential burden that seeking consent in difficult situations may cause against risk of bias by disproportionately excluding children who die or are transferred. Ethics committees could consider approving the use of already collected data when best efforts to obtain deferred consent are unsuccessful.
More Related Videos
08:22Remotely Supervised Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation: An Update on Safety and Tolerability
Published on: October 7, 2017
08:53Randomized, Triple-Blind, and Parallel-Controlled Trial of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognitive Rehabilitation after Stroke
Published on: June 6, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Blinding
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation III: AED Use