Use of a modified informed consent process among vulnerable patients: A descriptive study

Journal of General Internal Medicine

Volumn 21, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 867-873

  Sudore, Rebecca L ^a   Landefeld, C Seth ^a   Williams, Brie A ^a   Barnes, Deborah E ^a   Lindquist, Karla ^a   Schillinger, Dean ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Communication; Ethics; Health literacy; Informed consent; Vulnerable populations

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICAN; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; DEMOGRAPHY; ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; LANGUAGE; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; READING; SCORING SYSTEM; TEACHING;

AGED; COMPREHENSION; CONSENT FORMS; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; MENTAL COMPETENCY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT EDUCATION; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 33745789621     PISSN: 08848734     EISSN: 15251497     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00535.x     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Wendler D. Can we ensure that all research subjects give valid consent? Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:2201-4.
2. Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary PD, Clark JW, Weeks JC. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet. 2001;358:1772-7.
3. Weiss BD, Blanchard JS, McGee DL, et al. Illiteracy among Medicaid recipients and its relationship to health care costs. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 1994;5:99-111.
4. Stedman LD, Kaestle CF. Literacy and reading performance in the United States from 1880 to the present. In: Kaestle CF, ed. Literacy in the United States: Readers and Reading Since 1880. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1991:75-128.
5. Levine R. Ethics and Regulations of Clinical Research. 2nd edn. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1986.
6. Paasche-Orlow MK, Taylor HA, Brancati FL. Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:721-6.
7. Murgatroyd RJ, Cooper RM. Readability of informed consent forms. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1991;48:2651-2.
8. Grundner TM. On the readability of surgical consent forms. N Engl J Med. 1980;302:900-2.
9. Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, Pramanik S, Divers SG. Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90:668-74.
10. Tait AR, Voepel-Lewis T, Malviya S, Philipson SJ. Improving the readability and processabiliry of a pediatric informed consent document: effects on parents' understanding. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159:347-52.
11. Campbell FA, Goldman BD, Boccia ML, Skinner M. The effect of format modifications and reading comprehension on recall of informed consent information by low-income parents: a comparison of print, video, and computer-based presentations. Patient Educ Couns. 2004;53:205-16.
12. Young DR, Hooker DT, Freeberg FE. Informed consent documents: increasing comprehension by reducing reading level. IRB. 1990;12:1-5.
13. Rogers CG, Tyson JE, Kennedy KA, Broyles RS, Hickman JF. Conventional consent with opting in versus simplified consent with opting out: an exploratory trial for studies that do not increase patient risk. J Pediatr. 1998;132:606-11.
14. Bjorn E, Rossel P, Holm S. Can the written information to research subjects be improved? - An empirical study. J Med Ethics. 1999;25:263-7.
15. Murphy DA, O'Keefe ZH, Kaufman AH. Improving comprehension and recall of information for an HIV vaccine trial among women at risk for HIV: reading level simplification and inclusion of pictures to illustrate key concepts. AIDS Educ Prev. 1999;11:389-99.
16. Dresden GM, Levitt MA. Modifying a standard industry clinical trial consent form improves patient information retention as part of the informed consent process. Acad Emerg Med. 2001;8:246-52.
17. Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary PD, Clark JW, Weeks JC. Quality of informed consent: a new measure of understanding among research subjects. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:139-47.
18. Coletti AS, Heagerty P, Sheon AR, et al. Randomized, controlled evaluation of a prototype informed consent process for HIV vaccine efficacy trials. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003;32:161-9.
19. Flory J, Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review. JAMA. 2004;292:1593-601.
20. Miller CK, O'Donnell DC, Searight HR, Barbarash RA. The Deaconess Informed Consent Comprehension Test: an assessment tool for clinical research subjects. Pharmacotherapy. 1996;16:872-8.
21. Taub HA, Baker MT. The effect of repeated testing upon comprehension of informed consent materials by elderly volunteers. Exp Aging Res. 1983;9:135-8.
22. Taub HA, Kline GE, Baker MT. The elderly and informed consent: effects of vocabulary level and corrected feedback. Exp Aging Res. 1981;7:137-46.
23. Wirshing DA, Wirshing WC, Marder SR, Liberman RP, Mintz J. Informed consent: assessment of comprehension. Am J Psychiatry. 1998;155:1508-11.
24. Stiles PG, Poythress NG, Hall A, Falkenbach D, Williams R. Improving understanding of research consent disclosures among persons with mental illness. Psychiatr Serv. 2001;52:780-5.
25. Paasche-Orlow MK, Riekert KA, Bilderback A, et al. Tailored education may reduce health literacy disparities in asthma self-management. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;172:980-6.
26. Sudore RL, Brody R, Lin L, Schillinger D. Code status unknown: tailoring an advanced health care directive form to the literacy levels of patients at a public hospital. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17(suppl 1):88.
27. Schillinger D, Grumbach K, Piette J, et al. Association of health literacy with diabetes outcomes. JAMA. 2002;288:475-82.
28. Tannenbaum S. The eye chart and Dr. Snellen. J Am Optom Assoc. 1971;42:89-90.
29. Kincaid JP, Fishburne RP, Rogers RL, Chissom BS. Derivation of anew readability formulas (Automated Readability Index, Fog Count, and Flesch Reading Ease Formula) for Navy enlisted personnel. Research Branch report 8-75. Memphis: Naval Air Station; 1975.
30. McLaughlin GH. SMOG grading: a new readability formula. J Reading. 1969;12:639-46.
31. Borson S, Scanlan JM, Chen P, Ganguli M. The Mini-Cog as a screen for dementia: validation in a population-based sample. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003;51:1451-4.
32. Baker DW, Williams MV, Parker RM, Gazmararian JA, Nurss J. Development of a brief test to measure functional health literacy. Patient Educ Couns. 1999;38:33-42.
33. STATA. Statistics/Data Analysis. Intercooled, Version 8.0. College Station, TX: STATA; 1984-2003. Available at: http://www.stata.com. Accessed December 14, 2005.
34. Corbie-Smith GM. Minority recruitment and participation in health research. NC Med J. 2004;65:385-7.
35. Torke AM, Corbie-Smith GM, Branch WT Jr. African American patients' perspectives on medical decision making. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:525-30.
36. Cooper LA, Roter DL, Johnson RL, Ford DE, Steinwachs DM, Powe NR. Patient-centered communication, ratings of care, and concordance of patient and physician race. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:907-15.
37. Davis TC, Fredrickson DD, Arnold C, Murphy PW, Herbst M, Bocchini JA. A polio immunization pamphlet with increased appeal and simplified language does not improve comprehension to an acceptable level. Patient Educ Couns. 1998;33:25-37.
38. Davis TC, Bocchini JA Jr, Fredrickson D, et al. Parent comprehension of polio vaccine information pamphlets. Pediatrics. 1996;97(part 1):804-10.
39. Coyne CA, Xu R, Raich P, et al. Randomized, controlled trial of an easy-to-read informed consent statement for clinical trial participation: a study of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:836-42.
40. Baker DW, Parker RM, Williams MV, et al. The health care experience of patients with low literacy. Arch Fam Med. 1996;5:329-34.
41. Schillinger D, Bindman A, Wang F, Stewart A, Piette J. Functional health literacy and the quality of physician-patient communication among diabetes patients. Patient Educ Couns. 2004;52:315-23.
42. Taub HA, Baker MT, Kline GE, Sturr JF. Comprehension of informed consent information by young-old through old-old volunteers. Exp Aging Res. 1987;13:173-8.
43. Leyva M, Sharif I, Ozuah PO. Health literacy among Spanish-speaking Latino parents with limited English proficiency. Ambul Pediatr. 2005;5:56-9.
44. Betancourt JR, Jacobs EA, Language barriers to informed consent and confidentiality: the impact on women's health. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2000;55:294-5.
45. Roberts CM. Meeting the needs of patients with limited English proficiency. J Med Pract Manage. 2001;17:71-5.
46. Pape T. Legal and ethical considerations of informed consent. AORN J. 1997;65:1122-7.
47. Taub HA, Baker MT. A reevaluation of informed consent in the elderly: a method for improving comprehension through direct testing. Clin Res. 1984;32:17-21.
48. Dunn LB, Lindamer LA, Palmer BW, Golshan S, Schneiderman LJ, Jeste DV. Improving understanding of research consent in middle-aged and elderly patients with psychotic disorders. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2002;10:142-50.
49. Dunn LB, Jeste DV. Enhancing informed consent for research and treatment. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2001;24:595-607.
50. The National Quality Forum. Learning from early adopters: improving patient safety through informed consent in limited english proficiency/low- literacy populations. 2005. Available at: http://www.qualityforum.org/ txinformedconsent1pager12-07-03.pdf. Accessed December 14, 2005.
51. Department of Health and Human Services. Protection of human subjects. 2005. Available at: http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.htm. Accessed December 14, 2005.