Cargando…
Consent Builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents
OBJECTIVE: To describe process innovations related to research informed consent documents, and development and formative evaluation of Consent Builder, a platform for generating consent documents for multicenter studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analysis of Institutional Review Board workflows and doc...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9329658/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35911667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooac069 |
_version_ | 1784757966949318656 |
---|---|
author | Sward, Katherine A Enriquez, Rene Burr, Jeri Ozier, Julie Roebuck, Megan Elliott, Carrie Dean, J Michael |
author_facet | Sward, Katherine A Enriquez, Rene Burr, Jeri Ozier, Julie Roebuck, Megan Elliott, Carrie Dean, J Michael |
author_sort | Sward, Katherine A |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To describe process innovations related to research informed consent documents, and development and formative evaluation of Consent Builder, a platform for generating consent documents for multicenter studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analysis of Institutional Review Board workflows and documents, followed by process redesign, document redesign, and software development. Locally developed software leverages REDCap and LaTeX. A small-scale usability study was conducted. RESULTS: Process innovations were combining document types, and conceptualizing 2-part informed consent documents: part 1 standardizing the study description and part 2 with local site verbiage. Consent Builder was implemented in the Trial Innovation Network. User survey scores were acceptable; but areas for improvement were noted. LaTeX coding was the biggest challenge for users. DISCUSSION: The process changes were generally well accepted. The software implementation uncovered un-accounted for assumptions, and variability in IRB review workflow across centers. Technical modifications may be needed before widespread implementation. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated proof-of-concept of an approach to generate research consent documents that are consistent across sites in study description, but which allow for customization of local site verbiage. The Consent Builder tool is an example of an operational innovation, helping meet a need that arose in part due to regulations around use of Single IRB for multicenter trials. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9329658 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93296582022-07-29 Consent Builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents Sward, Katherine A Enriquez, Rene Burr, Jeri Ozier, Julie Roebuck, Megan Elliott, Carrie Dean, J Michael JAMIA Open Research and Applications OBJECTIVE: To describe process innovations related to research informed consent documents, and development and formative evaluation of Consent Builder, a platform for generating consent documents for multicenter studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analysis of Institutional Review Board workflows and documents, followed by process redesign, document redesign, and software development. Locally developed software leverages REDCap and LaTeX. A small-scale usability study was conducted. RESULTS: Process innovations were combining document types, and conceptualizing 2-part informed consent documents: part 1 standardizing the study description and part 2 with local site verbiage. Consent Builder was implemented in the Trial Innovation Network. User survey scores were acceptable; but areas for improvement were noted. LaTeX coding was the biggest challenge for users. DISCUSSION: The process changes were generally well accepted. The software implementation uncovered un-accounted for assumptions, and variability in IRB review workflow across centers. Technical modifications may be needed before widespread implementation. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated proof-of-concept of an approach to generate research consent documents that are consistent across sites in study description, but which allow for customization of local site verbiage. The Consent Builder tool is an example of an operational innovation, helping meet a need that arose in part due to regulations around use of Single IRB for multicenter trials. Oxford University Press 2022-07-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9329658/ /pubmed/35911667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooac069 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research and Applications Sward, Katherine A Enriquez, Rene Burr, Jeri Ozier, Julie Roebuck, Megan Elliott, Carrie Dean, J Michael Consent Builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents |
title |
Consent Builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents |
title_full |
Consent Builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents |
title_fullStr |
Consent Builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents |
title_full_unstemmed |
Consent Builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents |
title_short |
Consent Builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents |
title_sort | consent builder: an innovative tool for creating research informed consent documents |
topic | Research and Applications |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9329658/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35911667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooac069 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT swardkatherinea consentbuilderaninnovativetoolforcreatingresearchinformedconsentdocuments AT enriquezrene consentbuilderaninnovativetoolforcreatingresearchinformedconsentdocuments AT burrjeri consentbuilderaninnovativetoolforcreatingresearchinformedconsentdocuments AT ozierjulie consentbuilderaninnovativetoolforcreatingresearchinformedconsentdocuments AT roebuckmegan consentbuilderaninnovativetoolforcreatingresearchinformedconsentdocuments AT elliottcarrie consentbuilderaninnovativetoolforcreatingresearchinformedconsentdocuments AT deanjmichael consentbuilderaninnovativetoolforcreatingresearchinformedconsentdocuments |