Literature DB >> 14604623

Developing ethical strategies to assist oncologists in seeking informed consent to cancer clinical trials.

R F Brown1, P N Butow, D G Butt, A R Moore, M H N Tattersall.   

Abstract

Randomised clinical trials have come to be regarded as the gold standard in treatment evaluation. However, many doctors see the discussion of a clinical trial as an intrusion into the doctor-patient relationship and find these discussions difficult to initiate. Detailed informed consent is now a requirement of patient participation in trials; however, it is known that patients commonly fail to understand and recall the information conveyed. These difficulties for doctors and patients raise questions about the ethical integrity of the informed consent process. In this study, we have developed a set of communication strategies underpinned by ethical, linguistic and psychological theory, designed to assist doctors in this difficult task. Initially, audiotape transcripts of 26 consultations in which 10 medical oncologists invited patients to participate in clinical trials were analysed by expert ethicists, linguists, oncologists and psychologists, using rigorous qualitative methodology. A subset of seven of these was subjected to detailed linguistic analysis. A strategies document was developed to address themes which emerged from these analyses. This document was presented to relevant expert stakeholders. Their feedback was incorporated into the final document. Four themes emerged from the analysis; (a) shared decision-making, (b) the sequence of moves in the consultation, (c) the type and clarity of the information provided and (d) disclosure of controversial information and coercion. Detailed strategies were developed to assist doctors to communicate in these areas. We have developed a set of ethical strategies which may assist health professionals in this difficult area. A training package based on these strategies is currently being evaluated in a multi-centre randomised controlled trial.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14604623     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00204-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  44 in total

1.  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

Review 2.  How to handle informed consent in longitudinal studies when participants have a limited understanding of the study.

Authors:  G Helgesson; J Ludvigsson; U Gustafsson Stolt
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Discussing molecular testing in oncology care: Comparing patient and physician information preferences.

Authors:  Ana P M Pinheiro; Rachel H Pocock; Jeffrey M Switchenko; Margie D Dixon; Walid L Shaib; Suresh S Ramalingam; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Identifying patient information needs about cancer clinical trials using a Question Prompt List.

Authors:  Richard F Brown; Elyse Shuk; Phyllis Butow; Shawna Edgerson; Martin H N Tattersall; Jamie S Ostroff
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2010-08-02

5.  Sharing decisions in breast cancer care: Development of the Decision Analysis System for Oncology (DAS-O) to identify shared decision making during treatment consultations.

Authors:  Richard F Brown; Phyllis N Butow; Ilona Juraskova; Karin Ribi; Daniela Gerber; Jurg Bernhard; Martin H N Tattersall
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Power of an effective clinical conversation: improving accrual onto clinical trials.

Authors:  Linda K Parreco; Rhonda W DeJoice; Holly A Massett; Rose Mary Padberg; Sona S Thakkar
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 3.840

7.  Enhancing decision making about participation in cancer clinical trials: development of a question prompt list.

Authors:  Richard F Brown; Elyse Shuk; Natasha Leighl; Phyllis Butow; Jamie Ostroff; Shawna Edgerson; Martin Tattersall
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-07-01       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Oncologists' recommendations of clinical trial participation to patients.

Authors:  Susan Eggly; Terrance L Albrecht; Felicity W K Harper; Tanina Foster; Melissa M Franks; John C Ruckdeschel
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2007-11-05

9.  Why is recruitment to trials difficult? An investigation into recruitment difficulties in an RCT of supported employment in patients with severe mental illness.

Authors:  Louise Howard; Isabel de Salis; Zelda Tomlin; Graham Thornicroft; Jenny Donovan
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2008-07-31       Impact factor: 2.226

10.  Tailoring consent to context: designing an appropriate consent process for a biomedical study in a low income setting.

Authors:  Fasil Tekola; Susan J Bull; Bobbie Farsides; Melanie J Newport; Adebowale Adeyemo; Charles N Rotimi; Gail Davey
Journal:  PLoS Negl Trop Dis       Date:  2009-07-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.