|Results of trials of extended discussion intervensions|
|Standard control||Sample size||Understanding scores, %|
|Sarkar et al., 2010||Y°||Standardized, focus group discussion with study nurse in place of individual counseling°||Parents of malnourished children in Vellore, India||Real||118||73||73||NS|
|Freer et al., 2009||Y||Information leaflet and supplementary, standardized discussion with study staff°||Parents in United Kingdom||Simulated||21||69||85||0.015|
|Y||Information leaflet and supplementary, standardized discussion with study staff°||Parents in United States||Simulated||20||66||75||NS|
|Aaronson et al., 1996||Y°||Same presentation formats. Supplementary telephone conversation with oncology nurse°||Patients with cancer||Real||230||66||83||<.001§|
|Tindall et al., 1994||Y||Supplementary conversation with enrolling physician°||Patients with HIV||Real||113||60||63||NS∞|
|Simes et al., 1986||Y°||Uniform consent procedure ensuring total disclosure of information by physicians°||Patients with cancer||Real||57||62||74||0.0001*|
Abbreviations: NA Not Available, NS Not Significant, HIV human immunodeficiency virus.
Bolded rows indicate trials included in the 2004 systematic review by Flory and Emanuel.
°Human proctor available for question/answer.
* P value is for the overall outcomes which include "willingness to participate" and "anxiety".
§ Scores based on an “awareness scale” in an interview format after approximately 1 week.
∞ Understanding assessed at approximately 1 week.
Nishimura et al.
Nishimura et al. BMC Medical Ethics 2013 14:28 doi:10.1186/1472-6939-14-28