Posted by bryte on October 16, 2014, at 2:27:21
In reply to Re: Informed or Uninformed or Misinformed Consent, posted by Dr. Bob on October 15, 2014, at 16:17:59
> > Dr. Hsiung says "The mean number of attempts before eventually passing was 2.1." With a total of 31 possible answers to 10 questions, the mean number of attempts required to match 10 options with guesswork would be 3.1 -- even if the options were meaningless signals such as shapes, numbers or digits.
>
> 2.1 is significantly less than 3.1, so that would seen to be evidence that the options aren't meaningless signals.It says nothing about what the signals mean to whomever takes the test. The best clue those data could offer would be that half the people who take the quiz might understand the questions and half are doing nothing more than guessing while eliminating wrong answers when prompted.
If half of those who took the test answered every question correctly first time because they understood their answers, and half took the quiz by guesswork along with prompts revealing incorrect answers, the mean number of required attempts would be 2.05 (Mean 1/Mean 3.1). That is not significantly different than the 2.1 mean reported.
-----------------
> This isn't treatment, but there are risks. I think an informed consent process protects prospective participants.
What does it protect participants from, and how? Does it protect those who to pass the test by rote, guesswork, hints and brute force?
From Informed Consent: Its Origin, Purpose,Problems, and Limits:
"Although the doctrine of informed consent promotes ideals worth pursuing, a successful implementation of these ideals in practice has yet to occur. What has happened in practice is that attorneys, physicians, and hospital administrators often use consent forms mainly to protect physicians and medical facilities from liability." (Nancy Kettle, University of South Florida, 2002 Graduate Thesis.)
http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2522&context=etd
-----------------
> > USDHHS rules say "No informed consent, whether oral or written, may include any exculpatory language...
> > As an example of prohibited exculpatory language in informed consent documents, the USHHS offers "... I give up any property rights..."
>
> And as an example of acceptable language they offer:
> By consenting to participate, you authorize the use of your bodily fluids and tissue samples for the research described above.Exactly... for the "research described."
Consent requirements at this forum claim this is not research, much less describe the research or disclose that it was considered research last time the owner submitted the work to the authority of a legitimate IRB.
-----------------
> Would you be interested in participating in a panel at a conference?
>
> BobA person with no significant clinical experience other than student counseling, who has worked primarily as an assistant professor for 25 years after obtaining a medical license, and who has published no peer reviewed research beyond unsupervised musings about the person's own Web forum that relies on 14-year-old social-media technology is not someone I would recognize as a reliable source for information about psychiatric informatics and telecommunication in the post Web 2.0 era.
Appearances at conferences might help an assistant professor keep a job, but those credentials are not consistent with those of a person who is advancing science, improving clinical practice or elevating standards of care. That would not be someone I would want to join in a conference panel. I would be more interested in providing written comments to an independent editorial panel after reviewing a manuscript prior to publication.
poster:bryte
thread:1068731
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140902/msgs/1072338.html