Cargando…

Evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (ICONS): Protocol for the development of a core outcome set

BACKGROUND: The concept of informed consent is fundamental to medical practice. Shortcomings in the process can lead to patient complaints, litigation, unmet expectations and poor outcomes. Consent research has focused on developing tools to improve patient recall and understanding. However, the def...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Convie, Liam J., McCain, Scott, Campbell, Jeffrey, Kirk, Stephen J., Clarke, Mike
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6220506/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30400995
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2986-8
_version_ 1783368845925285888
author Convie, Liam J.
McCain, Scott
Campbell, Jeffrey
Kirk, Stephen J.
Clarke, Mike
author_facet Convie, Liam J.
McCain, Scott
Campbell, Jeffrey
Kirk, Stephen J.
Clarke, Mike
author_sort Convie, Liam J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The concept of informed consent is fundamental to medical practice. Shortcomings in the process can lead to patient complaints, litigation, unmet expectations and poor outcomes. Consent research has focused on developing tools to improve patient recall and understanding. However, the definitions, methods of measurement and timing of measurement vary widely across the studies that have been done. Although a Cochrane review has reported that many of these interventions appear to work, the high level of heterogeneity in outcome reporting prevents the identification of those interventions that work best and why they do so. It is also not clear which outcomes are most important to each party involved in the consent process and why. METHODS/DESIGN: This project will develop a core outcome set for assessing the effects of interventions aimed at improving informed consent for surgery and other invasive procedures for adult patients with the capacity to consent for themselves. We will conduct a systematic review of the qualitative and quantitative literature to identify outcomes used to date in consent research and map these into domains. A series of semi-structured key stakeholder interviews will also be used to identify relevant outcomes. These processes will produce a list of potential outcomes for assessing the effects of interventions to improve consent, which will be refined through an international Delphi survey and consensus webinars involving key stakeholders to produce the core outcome set. DISCUSSION: The ICONS study aims to develop a core outcome set for use in trials and reviews of interventions designed to improve the informed consent process for surgery and other invasive procedures. Our aim is that this core outcome set will reduce the level of selection and reporting bias in consent research and help clinicians to compare tools to improve consent. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2986-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6220506
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62205062018-11-15 Evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (ICONS): Protocol for the development of a core outcome set Convie, Liam J. McCain, Scott Campbell, Jeffrey Kirk, Stephen J. Clarke, Mike Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: The concept of informed consent is fundamental to medical practice. Shortcomings in the process can lead to patient complaints, litigation, unmet expectations and poor outcomes. Consent research has focused on developing tools to improve patient recall and understanding. However, the definitions, methods of measurement and timing of measurement vary widely across the studies that have been done. Although a Cochrane review has reported that many of these interventions appear to work, the high level of heterogeneity in outcome reporting prevents the identification of those interventions that work best and why they do so. It is also not clear which outcomes are most important to each party involved in the consent process and why. METHODS/DESIGN: This project will develop a core outcome set for assessing the effects of interventions aimed at improving informed consent for surgery and other invasive procedures for adult patients with the capacity to consent for themselves. We will conduct a systematic review of the qualitative and quantitative literature to identify outcomes used to date in consent research and map these into domains. A series of semi-structured key stakeholder interviews will also be used to identify relevant outcomes. These processes will produce a list of potential outcomes for assessing the effects of interventions to improve consent, which will be refined through an international Delphi survey and consensus webinars involving key stakeholders to produce the core outcome set. DISCUSSION: The ICONS study aims to develop a core outcome set for use in trials and reviews of interventions designed to improve the informed consent process for surgery and other invasive procedures. Our aim is that this core outcome set will reduce the level of selection and reporting bias in consent research and help clinicians to compare tools to improve consent. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2986-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-11-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6220506/ /pubmed/30400995 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2986-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Convie, Liam J.
McCain, Scott
Campbell, Jeffrey
Kirk, Stephen J.
Clarke, Mike
Evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (ICONS): Protocol for the development of a core outcome set
title Evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (ICONS): Protocol for the development of a core outcome set
title_full Evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (ICONS): Protocol for the development of a core outcome set
title_fullStr Evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (ICONS): Protocol for the development of a core outcome set
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (ICONS): Protocol for the development of a core outcome set
title_short Evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (ICONS): Protocol for the development of a core outcome set
title_sort evaluating interventions for informed consent for surgery (icons): protocol for the development of a core outcome set
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6220506/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30400995
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2986-8
work_keys_str_mv AT convieliamj evaluatinginterventionsforinformedconsentforsurgeryiconsprotocolforthedevelopmentofacoreoutcomeset
AT mccainscott evaluatinginterventionsforinformedconsentforsurgeryiconsprotocolforthedevelopmentofacoreoutcomeset
AT campbelljeffrey evaluatinginterventionsforinformedconsentforsurgeryiconsprotocolforthedevelopmentofacoreoutcomeset
AT kirkstephenj evaluatinginterventionsforinformedconsentforsurgeryiconsprotocolforthedevelopmentofacoreoutcomeset
AT clarkemike evaluatinginterventionsforinformedconsentforsurgeryiconsprotocolforthedevelopmentofacoreoutcomeset