Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Obtaining informed consent for delivery room research: the investigators' perspective
  1. Elizabeth E Foglia1,2,
  2. Louise S Owen3,4,5,
  3. Martin Keszler6,7,
  4. Peter G Davis3,4,5,
  5. Haresh Kirpalani1,2
  1. 1Division of Neonatology, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, USA
  2. 2University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, USA
  3. 3Department of Newborn Research, Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
  4. 4University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  5. 5Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia
  6. 6Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, USA
  7. 7Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Providence, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr E E Foglia, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, 8th floor Ravdin, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; foglia{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Research on delivery room (DR) resuscitation poses unique challenges. Because prospective informed consent is obtained before birth, many parents consent for studies for which their infants never become eligible.1 Conversely, many infants who require resuscitation are not enrolled, due to insufficient opportunity for parents to provide antenatal consent.2 One alternative is a waiver of prospective informed consent (or ‘retrospective’ or ‘deferred’ consent), in which eligible infants are enrolled after birth, and parents are approached for consent as soon as possible after enrolment. We sought to understand the views of international neonatal resuscitation scientists regarding these practices.

We surveyed participants at the Fourth International Neonatal Resuscitation Research Workshop (28–30 April 2015). Attendees included investigators, members of the International Liaison …

View Full Text


  • Contributors All authors were responsible for designing the questionnaire, distributing the questionnaire, interpreting the data and critically revising the manuscript. EEF wrote the first draft of this manuscript. All authors have approved the final version of the manuscript.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.