Cargando…

A Booklet on Participants’ Rights to Improve Consent for Clinical Research: A Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE: Information on the rights of subjects in clinical trials has become increasingly complex and difficult to understand. This study evaluates whether a simple booklet which is relevant to all research studies improves the understanding of rights needed for subjects to provide informed consen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Benatar, Jocelyne R., Mortimer, John, Stretton, Matthew, Stewart, Ralph A. H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3477160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23094034
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047023
_version_ 1782247206913310720
author Benatar, Jocelyne R.
Mortimer, John
Stretton, Matthew
Stewart, Ralph A. H.
author_facet Benatar, Jocelyne R.
Mortimer, John
Stretton, Matthew
Stewart, Ralph A. H.
author_sort Benatar, Jocelyne R.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Information on the rights of subjects in clinical trials has become increasingly complex and difficult to understand. This study evaluates whether a simple booklet which is relevant to all research studies improves the understanding of rights needed for subjects to provide informed consent. METHODS: 21 currently used informed consent forms (ICF) from international clinical trials were separated into information related to the specific research study, and general information on participants’ rights. A booklet designed to provide information on participants’ rights which used simple language was developed to replace this information in current ICF’s Readability of each component of ICF’s and the booklet was then assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Reading ease score (FK). To further evaluate the booklet 282 hospital inpatients were randomised to one of three ways to present research information; a standard ICF, the booklet combined with a short ICF, or the booklet combined with a simplified ICF. Comprehension of information related to the research proposal and to participant’s rights was assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS: Information related to participants’ rights contributed an average of 44% of the words in standard ICFs, and was harder to read than information describing the clinical trial (FK 25 versus (vs.) 41 respectively, p = 0.0003). The booklet reduced the number of words and improved FK from 25 to 42. The simplified ICF had a slightly higher FK score than the standard ICF (50 vs. 42). Comprehension assessed in inpatients was better for the booklet and short ICF 62%, (95% confidence interval (CI) 56 to 67) correct, or simplified ICF 62% (CI 58 to 68) correct compared to 52%, (CI 47 to 57) correct for the standard ICF, p = 0.009. This was due to better understanding of questions on rights (62% vs. 49% correct, p = 0.0008). Comprehension of study related information was similar for the simplified and standard ICF (60% vs. 64% correct, p = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: A booklet provides a simple consistent approach to providing information on participant rights which is relevant to all research studies, and improves comprehension of patients who typically participate in clinical trials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3477160
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34771602012-10-23 A Booklet on Participants’ Rights to Improve Consent for Clinical Research: A Randomized Trial Benatar, Jocelyne R. Mortimer, John Stretton, Matthew Stewart, Ralph A. H. PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: Information on the rights of subjects in clinical trials has become increasingly complex and difficult to understand. This study evaluates whether a simple booklet which is relevant to all research studies improves the understanding of rights needed for subjects to provide informed consent. METHODS: 21 currently used informed consent forms (ICF) from international clinical trials were separated into information related to the specific research study, and general information on participants’ rights. A booklet designed to provide information on participants’ rights which used simple language was developed to replace this information in current ICF’s Readability of each component of ICF’s and the booklet was then assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Reading ease score (FK). To further evaluate the booklet 282 hospital inpatients were randomised to one of three ways to present research information; a standard ICF, the booklet combined with a short ICF, or the booklet combined with a simplified ICF. Comprehension of information related to the research proposal and to participant’s rights was assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS: Information related to participants’ rights contributed an average of 44% of the words in standard ICFs, and was harder to read than information describing the clinical trial (FK 25 versus (vs.) 41 respectively, p = 0.0003). The booklet reduced the number of words and improved FK from 25 to 42. The simplified ICF had a slightly higher FK score than the standard ICF (50 vs. 42). Comprehension assessed in inpatients was better for the booklet and short ICF 62%, (95% confidence interval (CI) 56 to 67) correct, or simplified ICF 62% (CI 58 to 68) correct compared to 52%, (CI 47 to 57) correct for the standard ICF, p = 0.009. This was due to better understanding of questions on rights (62% vs. 49% correct, p = 0.0008). Comprehension of study related information was similar for the simplified and standard ICF (60% vs. 64% correct, p = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: A booklet provides a simple consistent approach to providing information on participant rights which is relevant to all research studies, and improves comprehension of patients who typically participate in clinical trials. Public Library of Science 2012-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3477160/ /pubmed/23094034 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047023 Text en © 2012 Benatar et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Benatar, Jocelyne R.
Mortimer, John
Stretton, Matthew
Stewart, Ralph A. H.
A Booklet on Participants’ Rights to Improve Consent for Clinical Research: A Randomized Trial
title A Booklet on Participants’ Rights to Improve Consent for Clinical Research: A Randomized Trial
title_full A Booklet on Participants’ Rights to Improve Consent for Clinical Research: A Randomized Trial
title_fullStr A Booklet on Participants’ Rights to Improve Consent for Clinical Research: A Randomized Trial
title_full_unstemmed A Booklet on Participants’ Rights to Improve Consent for Clinical Research: A Randomized Trial
title_short A Booklet on Participants’ Rights to Improve Consent for Clinical Research: A Randomized Trial
title_sort booklet on participants’ rights to improve consent for clinical research: a randomized trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3477160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23094034
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0047023
work_keys_str_mv AT benatarjocelyner abookletonparticipantsrightstoimproveconsentforclinicalresearcharandomizedtrial
AT mortimerjohn abookletonparticipantsrightstoimproveconsentforclinicalresearcharandomizedtrial
AT strettonmatthew abookletonparticipantsrightstoimproveconsentforclinicalresearcharandomizedtrial
AT stewartralphah abookletonparticipantsrightstoimproveconsentforclinicalresearcharandomizedtrial
AT benatarjocelyner bookletonparticipantsrightstoimproveconsentforclinicalresearcharandomizedtrial
AT mortimerjohn bookletonparticipantsrightstoimproveconsentforclinicalresearcharandomizedtrial
AT strettonmatthew bookletonparticipantsrightstoimproveconsentforclinicalresearcharandomizedtrial
AT stewartralphah bookletonparticipantsrightstoimproveconsentforclinicalresearcharandomizedtrial