Cargando…
Self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent
OBJECTIVE: Obtaining informed consent is a cornerstone requirement of conducting ethical research. Traditional paper-based consent is often excessively lengthy and may fail to achieve the desired participant understanding of study requirements. Multimedia tools including video and audio may be a use...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7383955/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32713850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036977 |
_version_ | 1783563524801298432 |
---|---|
author | Chapman, Niamh McWhirter, Rebekah Armstrong, Matthew K Fonseca, Ricardo Campbell, Julie A Nelson, Mark Schultz, Martin G Sharman, James E |
author_facet | Chapman, Niamh McWhirter, Rebekah Armstrong, Matthew K Fonseca, Ricardo Campbell, Julie A Nelson, Mark Schultz, Martin G Sharman, James E |
author_sort | Chapman, Niamh |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Obtaining informed consent is a cornerstone requirement of conducting ethical research. Traditional paper-based consent is often excessively lengthy and may fail to achieve the desired participant understanding of study requirements. Multimedia tools including video and audio may be a useful alternative. This study aimed to determine the efficacy, usability and acceptability of self-directed multimedia delivery of participant consent. DESIGN: It is a single-centre, randomised, prospective study to determine the efficacy, usability and acceptability of a self-directed multimedia consent process (intervention) compared with the traditional paper-based approach (control). The intervention was free of research staff, with computer-based finger-signed consent. SETTING: Pathology blood collection services in Tasmania, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 298 participants (63±8 years; 51% female individuals) referred from general practice were randomised to intervention (n=146) and control (n=152). OUTCOME MEASURES: Efficacy, usability and acceptability of the allocated consent process were assessed by a questionnaire. RESULTS: All participants successfully completed the allocated interventions. Efficacy parameters were higher among intervention participants, including a better understanding of study requirements compared with controls (p<0.05 all). Intervention participants were more likely to engage with the study information and spend more time on the consent process (p=<0.001 and p=0.006, respectively). Both groups reported similar levels of acceptability, although more control participants reported that the study information was too long (24% vs 14%; p=0.020). CONCLUSION: A self-directed multimedia consent process is effective for achieving participant understanding and obtaining consent free of research staff. Thus, multimedia represents a viable method to reduce the burden on researchers, meet participant needs and achieve informed consent in clinical research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7383955 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73839552020-08-10 Self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent Chapman, Niamh McWhirter, Rebekah Armstrong, Matthew K Fonseca, Ricardo Campbell, Julie A Nelson, Mark Schultz, Martin G Sharman, James E BMJ Open Ethics OBJECTIVE: Obtaining informed consent is a cornerstone requirement of conducting ethical research. Traditional paper-based consent is often excessively lengthy and may fail to achieve the desired participant understanding of study requirements. Multimedia tools including video and audio may be a useful alternative. This study aimed to determine the efficacy, usability and acceptability of self-directed multimedia delivery of participant consent. DESIGN: It is a single-centre, randomised, prospective study to determine the efficacy, usability and acceptability of a self-directed multimedia consent process (intervention) compared with the traditional paper-based approach (control). The intervention was free of research staff, with computer-based finger-signed consent. SETTING: Pathology blood collection services in Tasmania, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 298 participants (63±8 years; 51% female individuals) referred from general practice were randomised to intervention (n=146) and control (n=152). OUTCOME MEASURES: Efficacy, usability and acceptability of the allocated consent process were assessed by a questionnaire. RESULTS: All participants successfully completed the allocated interventions. Efficacy parameters were higher among intervention participants, including a better understanding of study requirements compared with controls (p<0.05 all). Intervention participants were more likely to engage with the study information and spend more time on the consent process (p=<0.001 and p=0.006, respectively). Both groups reported similar levels of acceptability, although more control participants reported that the study information was too long (24% vs 14%; p=0.020). CONCLUSION: A self-directed multimedia consent process is effective for achieving participant understanding and obtaining consent free of research staff. Thus, multimedia represents a viable method to reduce the burden on researchers, meet participant needs and achieve informed consent in clinical research. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7383955/ /pubmed/32713850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036977 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Ethics Chapman, Niamh McWhirter, Rebekah Armstrong, Matthew K Fonseca, Ricardo Campbell, Julie A Nelson, Mark Schultz, Martin G Sharman, James E Self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent |
title | Self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent |
title_full | Self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent |
title_fullStr | Self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent |
title_full_unstemmed | Self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent |
title_short | Self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent |
title_sort | self-directed multimedia process for delivering participant informed consent |
topic | Ethics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7383955/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32713850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036977 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chapmanniamh selfdirectedmultimediaprocessfordeliveringparticipantinformedconsent AT mcwhirterrebekah selfdirectedmultimediaprocessfordeliveringparticipantinformedconsent AT armstrongmatthewk selfdirectedmultimediaprocessfordeliveringparticipantinformedconsent AT fonsecaricardo selfdirectedmultimediaprocessfordeliveringparticipantinformedconsent AT campbelljuliea selfdirectedmultimediaprocessfordeliveringparticipantinformedconsent AT nelsonmark selfdirectedmultimediaprocessfordeliveringparticipantinformedconsent AT schultzmarting selfdirectedmultimediaprocessfordeliveringparticipantinformedconsent AT sharmanjamese selfdirectedmultimediaprocessfordeliveringparticipantinformedconsent |