Literature DB >> 12610182

Randomized, controlled trial of an easy-to-read informed consent statement for clinical trial participation: a study of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group.

Cathy A Coyne1, Ronghui Xu, Peter Raich, Kathy Plomer, Mark Dignan, Lari B Wenzel, Diane Fairclough, Thomas Habermann, Linda Schnell, Susan Quella, David Cella.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Studies have documented that the majority of consent documents for medical diagnosis and treatment are written at a reading level above that of the majority of the U.S. population. This study hypothesized that use of an easy-to-read consent statement, when compared with a standard consent statement, will result in higher patient comprehension of the clinical treatment protocol, lower patient anxiety, higher patient satisfaction, and higher patient accrual.
METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in 44 institutions that were members or affiliates of three cooperative oncology groups. Institutions were randomly assigned to administer either an easy-to-read consent statement or the standard consent statement to patients being recruited to participate in selected cancer treatment trials. Telephone interviews were conducted with a total of 207 patients to assess study outcomes.
RESULTS: Patients in the intervention arm demonstrated significantly lower consent anxiety and higher satisfaction compared with patients in the control arm. Patient comprehension and state anxiety were not affected by the intervention. Accrual rates into the parent studies also did not differ significantly between the two study groups.
CONCLUSION: Clinical trial informed consent statements can be modified to be easier to read without omitting critical information. Patient anxiety and satisfaction can be affected by the consent document. The generalizability of these study results is limited by the characteristics of the patient sample. Ninety percent of the sample were white women, and the mean Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine score was approximately 64, indicating a literacy level at or above the ninth grade.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12610182     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.07.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  64 in total

1.  Research strategies that result in optimal data collection from the patient medical record.

Authors:  Katherine E Gregory; Lucy Radovinsky
Journal:  Appl Nurs Res       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 2.257

2.  Neurocognitive indicators predict results of an informed-consent quiz among substance-dependent treatment seekers entering a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Brian D Kiluk; Charla Nich; Kathleen M Carroll
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol Drugs       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.582

3.  A prospective analysis of the influence of older age on physician and patient decision-making when considering enrollment in breast cancer clinical trials (SWOG S0316).

Authors:  Sara H Javid; Joseph M Unger; Julie R Gralow; Carol M Moinpour; Antoinette J Wozniak; J Wendall Goodwin; Primo N Lara; Pamela A Williams; Laura F Hutchins; Carolyn C Gotay; Kathy S Albain
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2012-06-20

4.  Correlates of lower comprehension of informed consent among participants enrolled in a cohort study in Pune, India.

Authors:  Neelam S Joglekar; Swapna S Deshpande; Seema Sahay; Manisha V Ghate; Robert C Bollinger; Sanjay M Mehendale
Journal:  Int Health       Date:  2012-12-30       Impact factor: 2.473

5.  Satisfaction with the decision to participate in cancer clinical trials is high, but understanding is a problem.

Authors:  M Jefford; L Mileshkin; J Matthews; H Raunow; C O'Kane; T Cavicchiolo; H Brasier; M Anderson; J Reynolds
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  The prevalence of limited health literacy.

Authors:  Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Ruth M Parker; Julie A Gazmararian; Lynn T Nielsen-Bohlman; Rima R Rudd
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Improving the process of informed consent for percutaneous coronary intervention: patient outcomes from the Patient Risk Information Services Manager (ePRISM) study.

Authors:  John A Spertus; Richard Bach; Charles Bethea; Adnan Chhatriwalla; Jeptha P Curtis; Elizabeth Gialde; Mayra Guerrero; Kensey Gosch; Philip G Jones; Aaron Kugelmass; Bradley M Leonard; Edward J McNulty; Marc Shelton; Henry H Ting; Carole Decker
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2014-11-15       Impact factor: 4.749

8.  Racial/ethnic differences in clinical trial enrollment, refusal rates, ineligibility, and reasons for decline among patients at sites in the National Cancer Institute's Community Cancer Centers Program.

Authors:  Aisha T Langford; Ken Resnicow; Eileen P Dimond; Andrea M Denicoff; Diane St Germain; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Rebecca A Enos; Angela Carrigan; Kathy Wilkinson; Ronald S Go
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Do cancer patients fully understand clinical trial participation? A pilot study to assess informed consent and patient expectations.

Authors:  Ricardo J Wray; Jo Ellen Stryker; Eric Winer; George Demetri; Karen M Emmons
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.037

10.  Improving informed consent with minority participants: results from researcher and community surveys.

Authors:  Sandra Crouse Quinn; Mary A Garza; James Butler; Craig S Fryer; Erica T Casper; Stephen B Thomas; David Barnard; Kevin H Kim
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.