Improvement of informed consent and the quality of consent documents

The Lancet Oncology

Volumn 9, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 485-493

  Jefford, Michael ^a   Moore, Rosemary ^b  

^a PETER MACCALLUM CANCER CENTRE   (Australia)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; COMPREHENSION; GOOD CLINICAL PRACTICE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LINGUISTICS; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT RIGHT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; READING; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COMMUNICATION; COMPREHENSION; CONSENT FORMS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DISCLOSURE; ETHICS, CLINICAL; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; LANGUAGE; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT RIGHTS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT SELECTION; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONS;

EID: 42649086509     PISSN: 14702045     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70128-1     Document Type: Review

References (76)

1. Pierce J. "In the interest of humanity and the cause of science": the yellow fever volunteers. Mil Med 168 (2003) 857-863
2. Schloendorff v Society of New York Hospital [1914] 211 NY 125; 105 NE 92, 93 (NY Court of Appeals).
3. Salgo v Leland Stanford Jr University Board of Trustees [1957]. 317 P 2d 170. (California District Court of Appeal).
4. World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects (with clarifications) (1964). http://www.wma.net/e/policy/pdf/17c.pdf (accessed Feb 19, 2008).
5. Emanuel E., Wendler D., and Grady C. What makes clinical research ethical?. JAMA 283 (2000) 2701-2711
6. Canterbury v Spence [1972]. 464 F 2d. (US Court of Appeals: District of Columbia).
7. Cobbs v Grant [1972]. 8 Cal 3d 229, 104 Cal Rptr 505, 502 P 2d 1.
8. International Conference on Harmonisation. International Conference on Harmonisation of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use ICH tripartite guideline 1996. http://www.ich.org/LOB/media/MEDIA482.pdf (accessed Feb 19, 2008).
9. National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Research Council, Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee. National statement on ethical conduct in human research (2007). http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/e72syn.htm (accessed Feb 19, 2008).
10. US National Institutes of Health. Guidelines for the conduct of research involving human subjects at the National Institutes of Health 2004. US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Services, National Institutes of Health 00-4783. http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/GrayBooklet82404.pdf (accessed Feb 19, 2008).
11. Truog R., Robinson W., Randolph A., and Morris A. Is informed consent always necessary for randomized, controlled trials?. N Engl J Med 340 (1999) 804-807
12. Brody B., McCullough L., and Sharp R. Consensus and controversy in clinical research ethics. JAMA 294 (2005) 1411-1414
13. Silverman H., Luce J., Lanken P., et al. Recommendations for informed consent forms for critical care clinical trials. Crit Care Med 33 (2005) 867-882
14. Jefford M., Mileshkin L., Raunow H., et al. Satisfaction with the decision to participate in cancer clinical trials (CCT) is high, but understanding is a problem. J Clin Oncol 23 suppl 16 (2005) 6067
15. Sharp S. Consent documents for oncology trials: does anybody read these things?. Am J Clin Oncol 27 (2004) 570-575
16. Cassileth B., Zupkis R., Sutton-Smith K., and March V. Informed consent-why are its goals imperfectly realized?. N Engl J Med 302 (1980) 896-900
17. Schaeffer M., Krantz D., Wichman A., et al. The impact of disease severity on the informed consent process in clinical research. Am J Med 100 (1996) 261-268
18. Lavelle-Jones C., Byrne D., Rice P., and Cuschieri A. Factors affecting quality of informed consent. BMJ 306 (1993) 885-890
19. Snowdon C., Garcia J., and Elbourne D. Making sense of randomization; responses of parents of critically ill babies to random allocation of treatment in a clinical trial. Soc Sci Med 45 (1997) 1337-1355
20. Meisel A., and Roth L. What we do and do not know about informed consent. JAMA 246 (1981) 2473-2477
21. Verheggen F., Jonkers R., and Kok G. Patients' perceptions on informed consent and the quality of information disclosure in clinical trials. Patient Educ Couns 29 (1996) 137-153
22. Penman D., Holland J., Bahna G., et al. Informed consent for investigational chemotherapy: patients' and physicians' perceptions. J Clin Oncol 2 (1984) 849-855
23. Olver I., Buchanan L., Laidlaw C., and Poulton G. The adequacy of consent forms for informing patients entering oncological clinical trials. Ann Oncol 6 (1995) 867-870
24. Rimer B., Jones W., Keintz M., et al. Informed consent: a crucial step in cancer patient education. Health Educ Q 10 suppl (1984) 30-42
25. Siminoff L., Fetting J., and Abeloff M. Doctor-patient communication about breast cancer adjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol 7 (1989) 1192-1200
26. Sutherland H., Lockwood G., and Till J. Are we getting informed consent from patients with cancer?. J R Soc Med 83 (1990) 439-443
27. Titus S., and Keane M. Do you understand?: an ethical assessment of researchers' description of the consenting process. J Clin Ethics 7 (1996) 60-68
28. Riecken H., and Ravich R. Informed consent to biomedical research in Veterans Administration Hospitals. JAMA 248 (1982) 344-348
29. Joffe S., Cook E., Cleary P., et al. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet 358 (2001) 1772-1777
30. Lynoe N., Sandlund M., and Jacobsson L. Clinical cancer research-some aspects on doctors' attitudes to informing participants. Acta Oncol 35 (1996) 749-754
31. Coyne C., 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 21 (2003) 836-842
32. Cox A., Fallowfield L., and Jenkins V. Communication and informed consent in phase 1 trials: a review of the literature. Support Care Cancer 14 (2006) 303-309
33. Edwards S., Lilford R., and Hewison J. The ethics of randomised controlled trials from the perspectives of patients, the public, and healthcare professionals. BMJ 317 (1998) 1209-1212
34. Joffe S., Cook E., Cleary P., et al. Quality of informed consent: a new measure of understanding among research subjects. J Natl Cancer Inst 93 (2001) 139-147
35. Jenkins V., Fallowfield L., Souhami A., and Sawtell M. How do doctors explain randomised clinical trials to their patients?. Eur J Cancer 35 (1999) 1187-1193
36. Kodish E., Eder M., Noll R., et al. Communication of randomization in childhood leukemia trials. JAMA 291 (2004) 470-475
37. Butow P., Brown R., and Tattersall M. Ethics of clinical trials. N Engl J Med 342 (2000) 978
38. Simes R., Tattersall M., Coates A., et al. Randomised comparison of procedures for obtaining informed consent in clinical trials of treatment for cancer. Br Med J 293 (1986) 1065-1068
39. Grundner T. On the readability of surgical consent forms. N Engl J Med 302 (1980) 900-902
40. Grossman S., Piantadosi S., and Covahey C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families?. J Clin Oncol 12 (1994) 2211-2215
41. Michielutte R., Bahnson J., and Beal P. Readability of the public education literature on cancer prevention and detection. J Cancer Educ 5 (1990) 55-61
42. Davis T., Crouch M., Wills G., et al. The gap between patient reading comprehension and the readability of patient education materials. J Fam Pract 31 (1990) 533-538
43. Paasche-Orlow M., Taylor H., and Brancati F. Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability. N Engl J Med 348 (2003) 721-726
44. Davis T., Williams M., Marin E., et al. Health literacy and cancer communication. CA Cancer J Clin 52 (2002) 134-149
45. Barratt A., Ragg M., Cockburn J., et al. How to prepare and present evidence-based information for consumers of health services: a literature review (1999) (2000), National Health and Medical Research Council, Canberra
46. Jubelirer S., Linton J., and Magnetti S. Reading versus comprehension: implications for patient education and consent in an outpatient oncology clinic. J Cancer Educ 9 (1994) 26-29
47. Holmes-Rovner M., Stableford S., Fagerlin A., et al. Evidence-based patient choice: a prostate cancer decision aid in plain language. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 5 (2005) 16
48. Michie S., and Lester K. Words matter: increasing the implementation of clinical guidelines. Qual Saf Health Care 14 (2005) 367-370
49. Davis T., Holcombe R., Berkel H., et al. Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst 90 (1998) 668-674
50. Bjorn E., Rossel P., and Holm S. Can the written information to research subjects be improved? An empirical study. J Med Ethics 25 (1999) 263-267
51. Beardsley E., Jefford M., and Mileshkin L. Longer consent forms for clinical trials compromise patient understanding: so why are they lengthening?. J Clin Oncol 25 (2007) e13-e14
52. Taub H., Baker M., Kline G., and Sturr J. Comprehension of informed consent information by young-old through old-old volunteers. Exp Aging Res 13 (1987) 173-178
53. Paris A., da Gama Chaves D.N., Cornu C., et al. Improvement of the comprehension of written information given to healthy volunteers in biomedical research: a single-blind randomized controlled study. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 21 (2007) 207-214
54. Young D., Hooker D., and Freeberg F. Informed consent documents: increasing comprehension by reducing reading level. IRB 12 (1990) 1-5
55. Morrow G. How readable are subject consent forms?. JAMA 244 (1980) 56-58
56. Campbell F., Goldman B., Boccia M., and 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 53 (2004) 205-216
57. Flory J., and Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review. JAMA 292 (2004) 1593-1601
58. Aaronson N., Visser-Pol E., Leenhouts G., et al. Telephone-based nursing intervention improves the effectiveness of the informed consent process in cancer clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 14 (1996) 984-996
59. Silva M., and Sorrell J. Enhancing comprehension of information for informed consent: a review of empirical research. IRB 10 (1988) 1-5
60. Juraskova I., Butow P., Lopez A., et al. Improving informed consent in clinical trials: successful piloting of a decision aid. J Clin Oncol 25 (2007) 1443-1444
61. Brown R., Butow P., Dunn S., and Tattersall M. Promoting patient participation and shortening cancer consultations: a randomised trial. Br J Cancer 85 (2001) 1273-1279
62. Skene L., and Millwood S. 'Informed consent' to medical procedures: The current law in Australia, doctors' knowledge of the law and their practices in informing patients. In: Shotton L. (Ed). Health, law and ethics (1997), Social Science Press, Australia 69-92
63. Gore D. Ethical, professional, and legal obligations in clinical practice: a series of discussion topics for postgraduate medical education. Introduction and topic 1: informed consent. Postgrad Med J 77 (2001) 238-239
64. Brown R., Butow P., Butt D., et al. Developing ethical strategies to assist oncologists in seeking informed consent to cancer clinical trials. Soc Sci Med 58 (2004) 379-390
65. Brown R., Butow P., Boyle F., and Tattersall M. Seeking informed consent to cancer clinical trials; evaluating the efficacy of doctor communication skills training. Psychooncology 16 (2007) 507-516
66. Lawson S., and Adamson H. Informed consent readability: subject understanding of 15 common consent form phrases. IRB 17 (1995) 16-19
67. Baker D. The meaning and the measure of health literacy. J Gen Intern Med 21 (2006) 878-883
68. Meade C., and Howser D. Consent forms: how to determine and improve their readability. Oncol Nurs Forum 19 (1992) 1523-1528
69. Lethborg C, Kirsner A. She's got what? A story about cancer. Melbourne: St Vincent's Hospital.
70. Eder M., Yamokoski A., Wittmann P., and Kodish E. Improving informed consent: suggestions from parents of children with leukemia. Pediatrics 119 (2007) e849-e859
71. Albrecht T., Blanchard C., Ruckdeschel J., et al. Strategic physician communication and oncology clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 17 (1999) 3324-3332
72. Australian National Breast Cancer Centre and National Cancer Control Initiative. Clinical practice guidelines for the psychosocial care of adults with cancer (2000), National Breast Cancer Centre, Camperdown. http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/cp90syn.htm (accessed Feb 19, 2008).
73. Stryker J., Wray R., Emmons K., et al. Understanding the decisions of cancer clinical trial participants to enter research studies: factors associated with informed consent, patient satisfaction, and decisional regret. Patient Educ Couns 63 (2006) 104-109
74. Ferguson P. Patients' perceptions of information provided in clinical trials. J Med Ethics 28 (2002) 45-48
75. Doak C., Doak L., Friedell G., and Meade C. Improving comprehension for cancer patients with low literacy skills: strategies for clinicians. CA Cancer J Clin 48 (1998) 151-162
76. Taylor K., Bezjak A., Hunter R., and Fraser S. Informed consent for clinical trials: is simpler better?. J Natl Cancer Inst 90 (1998) 644-645