Comprehension and informed consent: Assessing the effect of a short consent form

IRB Ethics and Human Research

Volumn 32, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 1-9

  Stunkel, Leanne ^a   Benson, Meredith ^b   Mclellan, Louise ^b   Sinaii, Ninet ^a   Bedarida, Gabriella ^b   Emanuel, Ezekiel ^a   Grady, Christine ^a  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

^b Pfizer Clinical Research Unit   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATORVASTATIN; HEPTANOIC ACID DERIVATIVE; PYRROLE DERIVATIVE;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPREHENSION; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; CONTRACEPTION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RESEARCH SUBJECT; UNITED STATES; HEALTH LITERACY; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); PROCEDURES;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CLINICAL TRIALS, PHASE I AS TOPIC; COMPREHENSION; CONNECTICUT; CONTRACEPTION; FEMALE; HEALTH LITERACY; HEPTANOIC ACIDS; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PYRROLES; RESEARCH SUBJECTS;

EID: 77955186389     PISSN: 01937758     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Fortun P, West J, Chalkley L, et al. Recall of informed consent information by healthy volunteers in clinical trials. Quarterly Journal of Medicine 2008; 101: 625-629;
2. Lynoe N, Sandlund M, Dahlqvist G, et al. Informed consent: Study of quality of information given to participants in a clinical trial. BMJ 1991; 303: 610-613.
3. Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary PD, et al. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: A cross-sectional survey. Lancet 2001;358:1772-1777.
4. Grossman SA, Piantadosi S, Covahey C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? Journal of Clinical Oncology 1994; 12: 2211-2215
5. Mader TJ, Playe SJ. Emergency medicine research consent form readability assessment. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1997; 29: 534-539
6. Paasche-Orlow MK, Taylor HA, Brancati FL. Readability standards for informedconsent forms as compared with actual readability. NEJM 2003; 348: 721-726.
7. Flory J, Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research: A systematic review. JAMA 2004; 292: 1593-1601.
8. Epstein LC, Lasagna L. Obtaining informed consent. Form or substance. Archives of Internal Medicine 1969; 123: 682-688
9. Young DR, Hooker DT, Freeberg FE. Informed consent documents: Increasing comprehension by reducing reading level. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 1990; 12: 1-5
10. Rogers CG, Tyson JE, Kennedy KA, et al. Conventional consent with opting in versus simplified consent with opting out: An exploratory trial for studies that do not increase patient risk. Journal of Pediatrics 1998; 132: 606-611
11. Bjorn E, Rossel P, Holm S. Can the written information to research subjects be improved?-an empirical study. Journal of Medical Ethics 1999; 25: 263-267
12. 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 Education and Prevention 1999; 11: 389-399
13. Dresden GM, Levitt MA. Modifying a standard industry clinical trial consent form improves patient information retention as part of the informed consent process. Academic Emergency Medicine 2001; 8: 246-252.
14. Taub HA, Baker MT, Sturr JF. Informed consent for research. Effects of readability, patient age, and education. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1986; 34: 601-606
15. Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, et al. Informed consent for clinical trials: A comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 1998; 90: 668-674
16. Stiles PG, Poythress NG, Hall A, et al. Improving understanding of research consent disclosures among persons with mental illness. Psychiatric Services 2001; 52: 780-785
17. see ref. 5, Bjorn et al. 1999
18. 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. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2003; 21: 836-842.
19. See ref. 5, Epstein and Lasagna 1969
20. see ref. 5, Young et al. 1990
21. see ref. 5, Bjorn et al. 1999
22. see ref. 5, Murphy et al. 1999
23. see ref. 5, Dresden and Levitt 2001.
24. See ref. 5, Dresden and Levitt 2001
25. see ref. 5, Rogers et al. 1998
26. see ref. 6, Taub et al. 1986
27. see ref. 6, Coyne et al. 2003.
28. -45 CFR 46.116 and 21 CFR 50.25.
29. See ref. 5, Rogers et al. 1998
30. Menikoff J. Case study. Is longer always better? Commentary. Hastings Center Report 2008; 38: 11-12
31. Sachs GA, Hougham GW, Sugarman J, et al. Conducting empirical research on informed consent: Challenges and questions. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 2003 Suppl 25:S4-S10.
32. Denny CC, Grady C. Clinical research with economically disadvantaged populations. Journal of Medical Ethics 2007; 33: 382-385
33. Macklin R. On paying money to research subjects: "Due" and "undue" inducements. IRB: Ethics & Human Research 1981; 3: 1-6
34. Lemmens T, Elliott C. Guinea pigs on the payroll: The ethics of paying research subjects. Accountability in Research 1999; 7: 3-20.
35. Grady C. Money for research participation: Does it jeopardize informed consent? American Journal of Bioethics 2001;1: 40-44
36. Grady C. Payment of clinical research subjects. Journal of Clinical Investigation 2005; 115: 1681-1687
37. McNeill P. Paying people to participate in research: Why not? A response to Wilkinson and Moore. Bioethics 1997; 11: 390-396.
38. Lemmens T, Elliott C. Justice for the professional guinea pig. American Journal of Bioethics 2001; 1: 51-53
39. Anderson JA, Weijer C. The research subject as entrepreneur. American Journal of Bioethics 2001; 1: 67-69.
40. See ref. 2, Joffe et al. 2001
41. see ref. 11, Denny and Grady 2007
42. Howard JM, DeMets D. How informed is informed consent? The BHAT experience. Controlled Clinical Trials 1981; 2: 287-303.
43. See ref. 2, Joffe et al. 2001
44. see ref. 5, Young et al. 1990
45. see ref. 6, Taub et al. 1986
46. see ref. 14, Howard and DeMets 1981
47. Beardsley E, Jefford M, Mileshkin L. Longer consent forms for clinical trials compromise patient understanding: So why are they lengthening? Journal of Clinical Oncology 2007; 25: e13-14.