Table A1: Responses to questions exploring surrogate decision makers’ attitudes towards their involvement in the consent to research process across the four study scenarios

Baseline Scenario n (%) / Higher Risk
n (%) / Two Accepted Strategies
n (%) / Less Time For Consent Decision n (%)
SDM wants to be involved / Yes / 123 (90) / 121 (89) / 127 (93) / 128 (94)
No / 13 (10) / 15 (11) / 9 (7) / 8 (6)
Acceptability of SDM involvement / Acceptable / 115 (85) / 91 (67) / 118 (87) / 99 (73)
Neutral / 18 (13) / 31 (23) / 16 (12) / 24 (18)
Unacceptable / 3 (2) / 13 (10) / 2 (1) / 13 (10)
Perceptions of the experience / Opportunity / 83 (61) / 53 (39) / 79 (58) / 64 (47)
Neutral / 45 (33) / 54 (40) / 53 (39) / 46 (34)
Burden / 8 (6) / 28 (21) / 4 (3) / 26 (19)
Comfort with making consent decision / Comfortable / 68 (50) / 46 (34) / 80 (59) / 56 (41)
Neutral / 48 (35) / 50 (37) / 37 (27) / 49 (36)
Uncomfortable / 20 (15) / 39 (29) / 19 (14) / 31 (23)

Table A1 Legend: This table displays the frequency distribution and percentages of responses provided by surrogate decision makers for each of the questions asked across the four study scenarios. Frequency distributions were created by collapsing the extremes of the 7 point Likert scale. For SDMs’ rating of the acceptability of their involvement, “Acceptable” responses were those that were scored as “acceptable” to “highly acceptable”, Likert scores = 6 or 7; and “Unacceptable” responses were those scored as “highly unacceptable” to “unacceptable”, Likert scores = 1 or 2. Ratings of “Comfort” were scored as “comfortable” to “very comfortable”, Likert scores = 6 or 7; and ratings of “Uncomfortable” were scored as “very uncomfortable” to “uncomfortable”, Likert scores = 1 or 2. Ratings of “Burden” were scored as “a very large burden” to “somewhat of a burden”, Likert scores = 1 or 2; and ratings of “Opportunity” were scored as “a somewhat valuable opportunity” to “a very valuable opportunity”, Likert scores = 6 or 7.