Cargando…
Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study
OBJECTIVES: To analyse the parental understanding of informed consent information in first-line randomised clinical trials (RCTs) including children with malignant solid tumours and to assess parents’ needs for decision-making. DESIGN: Observational prospective study. SETTING: 3 paediatric oncology...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3657641/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23793670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002733 |
_version_ | 1782270154805084160 |
---|---|
author | Chappuy, Hélène Bouazza, Naim Minard-Colin, Veronique Patte, Catherine Brugières, Laurence Landman-Parker, Judith Auvrignon, Anne Davous, Dominique Pacquement, Hélène Orbach, Daniel Tréluyer, Jean Marc Doz, François |
author_facet | Chappuy, Hélène Bouazza, Naim Minard-Colin, Veronique Patte, Catherine Brugières, Laurence Landman-Parker, Judith Auvrignon, Anne Davous, Dominique Pacquement, Hélène Orbach, Daniel Tréluyer, Jean Marc Doz, François |
author_sort | Chappuy, Hélène |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To analyse the parental understanding of informed consent information in first-line randomised clinical trials (RCTs) including children with malignant solid tumours and to assess parents’ needs for decision-making. DESIGN: Observational prospective study. SETTING: 3 paediatric oncology centres in the Parisian region in France. PARTICIPANTS: 53 parents were approached to participate in a RCT for their child with malignant solid tumour, over a 1-year period. 40 parents have been interviewed in our study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Parental understanding of information in RCTs, parents’ needs for decision-making. Parents were questioned by a psychologist, independent of the paediatric oncology teams, using a semidirected interview, 1 (M1) and 6 months (M6) after the consent was sought. RESULTS: 18 parents (45%) did not understand the concept of randomisation. Half of the parents could explain neither the aim of the clinical trial nor the potential benefit to their child of inclusion. 35 parents (87.5%) expressed very few specific risks related to the trial. Being mostly French-speaking (p=0.03) and the reading of the information sheet by the parents (p=0.0025) improved their understanding. The parental comprehension did not differ between M1 and M6. The principal factors underlying their decision were confidence in the medical team (39%), wish to access to the best treatment (37%) and the best quality of life (37%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite medical explanations, parents have limited knowledge in some areas in first-line RCTs and improvements of information process are required. The risks specific to the randomised trial are underestimated by parents and the unproven nature of the treatment is not well-known or understood. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3657641 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36576412013-05-21 Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study Chappuy, Hélène Bouazza, Naim Minard-Colin, Veronique Patte, Catherine Brugières, Laurence Landman-Parker, Judith Auvrignon, Anne Davous, Dominique Pacquement, Hélène Orbach, Daniel Tréluyer, Jean Marc Doz, François BMJ Open Ethics OBJECTIVES: To analyse the parental understanding of informed consent information in first-line randomised clinical trials (RCTs) including children with malignant solid tumours and to assess parents’ needs for decision-making. DESIGN: Observational prospective study. SETTING: 3 paediatric oncology centres in the Parisian region in France. PARTICIPANTS: 53 parents were approached to participate in a RCT for their child with malignant solid tumour, over a 1-year period. 40 parents have been interviewed in our study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Parental understanding of information in RCTs, parents’ needs for decision-making. Parents were questioned by a psychologist, independent of the paediatric oncology teams, using a semidirected interview, 1 (M1) and 6 months (M6) after the consent was sought. RESULTS: 18 parents (45%) did not understand the concept of randomisation. Half of the parents could explain neither the aim of the clinical trial nor the potential benefit to their child of inclusion. 35 parents (87.5%) expressed very few specific risks related to the trial. Being mostly French-speaking (p=0.03) and the reading of the information sheet by the parents (p=0.0025) improved their understanding. The parental comprehension did not differ between M1 and M6. The principal factors underlying their decision were confidence in the medical team (39%), wish to access to the best treatment (37%) and the best quality of life (37%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite medical explanations, parents have limited knowledge in some areas in first-line RCTs and improvements of information process are required. The risks specific to the randomised trial are underestimated by parents and the unproven nature of the treatment is not well-known or understood. BMJ Publishing Group 2013-05-15 /pmc/articles/PMC3657641/ /pubmed/23793670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002733 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode |
spellingShingle | Ethics Chappuy, Hélène Bouazza, Naim Minard-Colin, Veronique Patte, Catherine Brugières, Laurence Landman-Parker, Judith Auvrignon, Anne Davous, Dominique Pacquement, Hélène Orbach, Daniel Tréluyer, Jean Marc Doz, François Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study |
title | Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study |
title_full | Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study |
title_fullStr | Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study |
title_full_unstemmed | Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study |
title_short | Parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study |
title_sort | parental comprehension of the benefits/risks of first-line randomised clinical trials in children with solid tumours: a two-stage cross-sectional interview study |
topic | Ethics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3657641/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23793670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002733 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chappuyhelene parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT bouazzanaim parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT minardcolinveronique parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT pattecatherine parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT brugiereslaurence parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT landmanparkerjudith parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT auvrignonanne parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT davousdominique parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT pacquementhelene parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT orbachdaniel parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT treluyerjeanmarc parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy AT dozfrancois parentalcomprehensionofthebenefitsrisksoffirstlinerandomisedclinicaltrialsinchildrenwithsolidtumoursatwostagecrosssectionalinterviewstudy |