Literature DB >> 16242898

Understanding the decisions of cancer clinical trial participants to enter research studies: factors associated with informed consent, patient satisfaction, and decisional regret.

Jo Ellen Stryker1, Ricardo J Wray, Karen M Emmons, Eric Winer, George Demetri.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To understand the psychosocial outcomes related to decision-making processes of individuals eligible for participation in clinical trials.
METHODS: Individuals eligible to participate in selected clinical trials were contacted to complete two surveys; one shortly after participants were identified, and the second 6 weeks after the first survey was completed (N=50). Measures included subjective informed consent; satisfaction with decision-making; decisional regret; and timing of consent (early versus late signers). ANOVA and correlation coefficients were used to test the relationships between variables.
RESULTS: Early signers reported themselves to be less informed about the details of their particular clinical trials than later signers (M=81.9 versus 91.2; F=5.5; p=.02). There was a non-significant trend for early signers to be less satisfied with their decisions than late signers. Satisfaction with decision-making and subjective informed consent were both strongly associated with later decisional regret (r=-.32 and -.30, respectively). However, there was no relationship between timing of consent and decisional regret.
CONCLUSION: Participants who enroll in clinical trials quickly may not believe they fully understand the implications of trial participation. In general, participants who do not believe they fully understand the implications of trial participation, or who are less satisfied with their decision to enroll in the trial may ultimately feel regret about their decision to participate. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: More effort is needed to ensure that clinical trial participants fully understand the risks and benefits of participation and are satisfied with their decision to enroll in a trial prior to signing consent forms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16242898     DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2005.09.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  41 in total

1.  Does an interactive trust-enhanced electronic consent improve patient experiences when asked to share their health records for research? A randomized trial.

Authors:  Christopher A Harle; Elizabeth H Golembiewski; Kiarash P Rahmanian; Babette Brumback; Janice L Krieger; Kenneth W Goodman; Arch G Mainous; Ray E Moseley
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2019-07-01       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Parental recall of anesthesia information: informing the practice of informed consent.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Virginia Gauger
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 5.108

3.  Characteristics and outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer who declined to participate in a randomized clinical chemotherapy trial.

Authors:  Chiharu Tanai; Takako Eguchi Nakajima; Kengo Nagashima; Ken Kato; Tetsuya Hamaguchi; Yasuhide Yamada; Kei Muro; Kuniaki Shirao; Hideo Kunitoh; Yasuhiro Matsumura; Seiichiro Yamamoto; Yasuhiro Shimada
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  Use of mobile devices and the internet for multimedia informed consent delivery and data entry in a pediatric asthma trial: Study design and rationale.

Authors:  Kathryn Blake; Janet T Holbrook; Holly Antal; David Shade; H Timothy Bunnell; Suzanne M McCahan; Robert A Wise; Chris Pennington; Paul Garfinkel; Tim Wysocki
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 2.226

5.  Evaluation of an educational video to improve the understanding of radiotherapy side effects in head and neck cancer patients.

Authors:  Wilfredo Alejandro González-Arriagada; Marco Aurélio Carvalho de Andrade; Lara Maria Alencar Ramos; Jose Ribamar Sabino Bezerra; Alan Roger Santos-Silva; Marcio Ajudarte Lopes
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  A cognitive approach for design of a multimedia informed consent video and website in pediatric research.

Authors:  Holly Antal; H Timothy Bunnell; Suzanne M McCahan; Chris Pennington; Tim Wysocki; Kathryn V Blake
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 6.317

7.  Patient comprehension of an interactive, computer-based information program for cardiac catheterization: a comparison with standard information.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Mauro Moscucci; Colleen M Brennan-Martinez; Robert Levine
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-09

8.  Patient preference and decision-making for initiating metastatic colorectal cancer medical treatment.

Authors:  Alex Z Fu; Kristi D Graves; Roxanne E Jensen; John L Marshall; Margaret Formoso; Arnold L Potosky
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 4.553

9.  Informed consent prior to coronary angiography in a real world scenario: what do patients remember?

Authors:  Aslihan Eran; Erland Erdmann; Fikret Er
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-12-20       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Performance-based readability testing of participant information for a Phase 3 IVF trial.

Authors:  Peter Knapp; D K Raynor; Jonathan Silcock; Brian Parkinson
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.