Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Med Ethics. 2014 May 22;41(5):391–397. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2013-101987

Table 6.

Comparison of recollection and perception of risks, by motivation and doctor status.

Motivation Doctor Status
Responses (N/%) Direct personal benefit N= 54a Altruism/dual N= 35 a Own doctor N= 39 a Other N= 49 a
What do you recall about the main risks of the surgery and [the study intervention]?b
No, does not identify at least one risk of the procedure. 2 (3.7) 3 (8.6) 1 (2.6) 4 (8.2)
Identifies at least one risk for BOTH surgery and [study intervention]. 32 (59.3) 20 (57.1) 22 (56.4) 30 (61.2)
Identifies presence of risks for SURGERY ONLY 17 (31.5) 8 (22.9) 14 (35.9) 11 (22.4)
Identifies presence of risks for [study intervention] ONLY 3 (5.6) 4 (11.4) 2 (5.1) 4 (8.2)
Realistically, what do you think the chances are of your experiencing one or more adverse events?c
No chance at all 0 (0) 1 (2.9) 0 (0) 1 (2.1)
Very low chance 31 (59.6) 27 (79.4) 30 (81.1) 27 (57.4)
Modest chance 12 (23.1) 2 (5.9) 5 (13.5) 9 (19.1)
Good chance 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Very good chance 0 (0) 1 (2.9) 0 (0) 1 (2.1)
Tried not to think about it 4 (7.7) 1 (2.9) 0 (0) 4 (8.5)
Other 5 (9.6) 2 (5.9) 2 (5.4) 5 (10.6)
a

Denominator varies because of missing data for some questions.

b

Fisher’s exact test (identifies risks in both surgery and experimental treatment vs. all other responses): direct personal benefit vs. altruism/dual, p=1.0; own doctor vs other, p=0.67.

c

Fisher’s exact test (no/very low chance vs. all other responses): direct personal benefit vs. altruism/dual, p=0.03; own doctor vs. other, p=0.06.