BACKGROUND: Little is known about patient characteristics associated with comprehension of consent information, and whether modifications to the consent process can promote understanding. OBJECTIVE: To describe a modified research consent process, and determine whether literacy and demographic characteristics are associated with understanding consent information. DESIGN: Descriptive study of a modified consent process: consent form (written at a sixth-grade level) read to participants, combined with 7 comprehension questions and targeted education, repeated until comprehension achieved (teach-to-goal). PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and four ethnically diverse subjects, aged > or = 50, consenting for a trial to improve the forms used for advance directives. MEASUREMENTS: Number of passes through the consent process required to achieve complete comprehension. Literacy assessed in English and Spanish with the Short Form Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (scores 0 to 36). RESULTS:Participants had a mean age of 61 years and 40% had limited literacy (s-TOHFLA<23). Only 28% of subjects answered all comprehension questions correctly on the first pass. After adjustment, lower literacy (P=.04) and being black (P=.03) were associated with requiring more passes through the consent process. Not speaking English as a primary language was associated with requiring more passes through the consent process in bivariate analyses (P<.01), but not in multivariable analyses (P>.05). After the second pass, most subjects (80%) answered all questions correctly. With a teach-to-goal strategy, 98% of participants who engaged in the consent process achieved complete comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: Lower literacy and minority status are important determinants of understanding consent information. Using a modified consent process, little additional education was required to achieve complete comprehension, regardless of literacy or language barriers.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Little is known about patient characteristics associated with comprehension of consent information, and whether modifications to the consent process can promote understanding. OBJECTIVE: To describe a modified research consent process, and determine whether literacy and demographic characteristics are associated with understanding consent information. DESIGN: Descriptive study of a modified consent process: consent form (written at a sixth-grade level) read to participants, combined with 7 comprehension questions and targeted education, repeated until comprehension achieved (teach-to-goal). PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and four ethnically diverse subjects, aged > or = 50, consenting for a trial to improve the forms used for advance directives. MEASUREMENTS: Number of passes through the consent process required to achieve complete comprehension. Literacy assessed in English and Spanish with the Short Form Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (scores 0 to 36). RESULTS:Participants had a mean age of 61 years and 40% had limited literacy (s-TOHFLA<23). Only 28% of subjects answered all comprehension questions correctly on the first pass. After adjustment, lower literacy (P=.04) and being black (P=.03) were associated with requiring more passes through the consent process. Not speaking English as a primary language was associated with requiring more passes through the consent process in bivariate analyses (P<.01), but not in multivariable analyses (P>.05). After the second pass, most subjects (80%) answered all questions correctly. With a teach-to-goal strategy, 98% of participants who engaged in the consent process achieved complete comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: Lower literacy and minority status are important determinants of understanding consent information. Using a modified consent process, little additional education was required to achieve complete comprehension, regardless of literacy or language barriers.
Authors: Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Kristin A Riekert; Andrew Bilderback; Arjun Chanmugam; Peter Hill; Cynthia S Rand; Fred L Brancati; Jerry A Krishnan Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2005-08-04 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: David W Baker; Darren A DeWalt; Dean Schillinger; Victoria Hawk; Bernice Ruo; Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo; Morris Weinberger; Aurelia Macabasco-O'Connell; Michael Pignone Journal: J Health Commun Date: 2011
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
Authors: Judith M Resick; Robert M Arnold; Rebecca L Sudore; David Farrell; Shane Belin; Andrew D Althouse; Betty Ferrell; Bernard J Hammes; Edward Chu; Douglas B White; Kimberly J Rak; Yael Schenker Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2020-07-31 Impact factor: 2.226
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
Authors: Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Stanley J Chetcuti; Colleen Brennan-Martinez; Robert Levine Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2014-02-03 Impact factor: 4.046