Cargando…

Implementing a New Common Rule Requirement for Informed Consent: A Randomized Trial on Adult Asthma Patients

Objectives. To determine how the format of a clinical trial informed consent document can affect participants’ retention of enrollment-relevant information. Background. Recent changes to the US Federal Common Rule require informed consent documents for clinical trials to be concise and start with th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yu, Michael, Fischhoff, Baruch, Krishnamurti, Tamar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6440037/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30944885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468319839315
_version_ 1783407317539094528
author Yu, Michael
Fischhoff, Baruch
Krishnamurti, Tamar
author_facet Yu, Michael
Fischhoff, Baruch
Krishnamurti, Tamar
author_sort Yu, Michael
collection PubMed
description Objectives. To determine how the format of a clinical trial informed consent document can affect participants’ retention of enrollment-relevant information. Background. Recent changes to the US Federal Common Rule require informed consent documents for clinical trials to be concise and start with the information most relevant for enrollment decisions. However, there is limited guidance on how to identify this information or evaluate its impact. Design. Participants with a self-reported asthma diagnosis were randomized to one of five versions of the informed consent document for a clinical trial of an injectable asthma product: the original, full-length document; a concise version, removing information identified by asthma patients in an earlier study as not relevant to their enrollment decisions; an interactive version, where participants self-navigated to the information they chose; a reordered version, moving up information deemed more relevant for enrollment in an earlier study; and a highlights version, following the suggested revised Common Rule structure, starting with a summary of enrollment-relevant information based on patient ratings. Knowledge acquisition was evaluated with a knowledge test, with submeasures for information that had high and low relevance for enrollment decisions. Results. Participants who saw the highlights (“Common Rule”) version were more likely to answer questions about high enrollment-relevant information correctly than were participants who saw the full-length version (65% v 59%, P = 0.0105). Participants who saw the other revised versions did not perform significantly differently from the full-length version. Conclusions. An informed consent document designed to implement revised US Federal Common Rule requirements performed better than other designs, in terms of readers retaining information relevant for clinical trial enrollment, as characterized by potential trial participants in a separate study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6440037
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64400372019-04-03 Implementing a New Common Rule Requirement for Informed Consent: A Randomized Trial on Adult Asthma Patients Yu, Michael Fischhoff, Baruch Krishnamurti, Tamar MDM Policy Pract Original Article Objectives. To determine how the format of a clinical trial informed consent document can affect participants’ retention of enrollment-relevant information. Background. Recent changes to the US Federal Common Rule require informed consent documents for clinical trials to be concise and start with the information most relevant for enrollment decisions. However, there is limited guidance on how to identify this information or evaluate its impact. Design. Participants with a self-reported asthma diagnosis were randomized to one of five versions of the informed consent document for a clinical trial of an injectable asthma product: the original, full-length document; a concise version, removing information identified by asthma patients in an earlier study as not relevant to their enrollment decisions; an interactive version, where participants self-navigated to the information they chose; a reordered version, moving up information deemed more relevant for enrollment in an earlier study; and a highlights version, following the suggested revised Common Rule structure, starting with a summary of enrollment-relevant information based on patient ratings. Knowledge acquisition was evaluated with a knowledge test, with submeasures for information that had high and low relevance for enrollment decisions. Results. Participants who saw the highlights (“Common Rule”) version were more likely to answer questions about high enrollment-relevant information correctly than were participants who saw the full-length version (65% v 59%, P = 0.0105). Participants who saw the other revised versions did not perform significantly differently from the full-length version. Conclusions. An informed consent document designed to implement revised US Federal Common Rule requirements performed better than other designs, in terms of readers retaining information relevant for clinical trial enrollment, as characterized by potential trial participants in a separate study. SAGE Publications 2019-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6440037/ /pubmed/30944885 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468319839315 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Yu, Michael
Fischhoff, Baruch
Krishnamurti, Tamar
Implementing a New Common Rule Requirement for Informed Consent: A Randomized Trial on Adult Asthma Patients
title Implementing a New Common Rule Requirement for Informed Consent: A Randomized Trial on Adult Asthma Patients
title_full Implementing a New Common Rule Requirement for Informed Consent: A Randomized Trial on Adult Asthma Patients
title_fullStr Implementing a New Common Rule Requirement for Informed Consent: A Randomized Trial on Adult Asthma Patients
title_full_unstemmed Implementing a New Common Rule Requirement for Informed Consent: A Randomized Trial on Adult Asthma Patients
title_short Implementing a New Common Rule Requirement for Informed Consent: A Randomized Trial on Adult Asthma Patients
title_sort implementing a new common rule requirement for informed consent: a randomized trial on adult asthma patients
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6440037/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30944885
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2381468319839315
work_keys_str_mv AT yumichael implementinganewcommonrulerequirementforinformedconsentarandomizedtrialonadultasthmapatients
AT fischhoffbaruch implementinganewcommonrulerequirementforinformedconsentarandomizedtrialonadultasthmapatients
AT krishnamurtitamar implementinganewcommonrulerequirementforinformedconsentarandomizedtrialonadultasthmapatients