Literature DB >> 17570804

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

Ricardo J Wray1, Jo Ellen Stryker, Eric Winer, George Demetri, Karen M Emmons.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Accepted practices of informed consent often result in suboptimal patient understanding of research studies.
METHODS: This pilot study aimed to assess trial-specific tailored materials, compared to a widely used generic booklet about clinical trials, randomly assigned to 118 candidates for cancer clinical trials. Study outcomes were: satisfaction with decision-making; satisfaction with materials; and subjective understanding of the clinical trial.
RESULTS: There were no major differences between groups. Participants rated tailored materials higher as a useful reference.
CONCLUSIONS: Trial-specific materials hold utility for reference during clinical trials. Studies of informed consent are feasible, although important factors limit research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17570804     DOI: 10.1007/BF03174370

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cancer Educ        ISSN: 0885-8195            Impact factor:   2.037


  18 in total

Review 1.  The ethical foundation of informed consent in clinical research.

Authors:  M S McCabe
Journal:  Semin Oncol Nurs       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 2.315

2.  Decision-making process in patients before entering phase III cancer clinical trials: a pilot study.

Authors:  G A Huizinga; D T Sleijfer; H B van de Wiel; W T van der Graaf
Journal:  Cancer Nurs       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.592

Review 3.  Ethical issues in the development of new agents.

Authors:  C K Daugherty
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 3.850

4.  Quality of informed consent: a new measure of understanding among research subjects.

Authors:  S Joffe; E F Cook; P D Cleary; J W Clark; J C Weeks
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2001-01-17       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Telephone-based nursing intervention improves the effectiveness of the informed consent process in cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; E Visser-Pol; G H Leenhouts; M J Muller; A C van der Schot; F S van Dam; R B Keus; C C Koning; W W ten Bokkel Huinink; J A van Dongen; R Dubbelman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  S Joffe; E F Cook; P D Cleary; J W Clark; J C Weeks
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-11-24       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale.

Authors:  M Holmes-Rovner; J Kroll; N Schmitt; D R Rovner; M L Breer; M L Rothert; G Padonu; G Talarczyk
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  1996 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 8.  Attitudes towards and participation in randomised clinical trials in oncology: a review of the literature.

Authors:  P M Ellis
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 32.976

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

Authors:  Cathy A Coyne; Ronghui Xu; Peter Raich; Kathy Plomer; Mark Dignan; Lari B Wenzel; Diane Fairclough; Thomas Habermann; Linda Schnell; Susan Quella; David Cella
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-03-01       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement: oversight of clinical research.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-04-29       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  7 in total

1.  Pilot study demonstrating effectiveness of targeted education to improve informed consent understanding in AIDS clinical trials.

Authors:  Sohini Sengupta; Bernard Lo; Ronald P Strauss; Joseph Eron; Allen L Gifford
Journal:  AIDS Care       Date:  2011-06-14

2.  A comparison of patient knowledge of clinical trials and trialist priorities.

Authors:  P Cameron; G R Pond; R Y Xu; P M Ellis; J R Goffin
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Decision aids for randomised controlled trials: a qualitative exploration of stakeholders' views.

Authors:  Katie Gillies; Zoë C Skea; Marion K Campbell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Effect of individualized communication skills training on physicians' discussion of clinical trials in oncology: results from a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Alexander Wuensch; Tanja Goelz; Gabriele Ihorst; Darcey D Terris; Hartmut Bertz; Juergen Bengel; Michael Wirsching; Kurt Fritzsche
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 4.430

5.  Oncologic patients' misconceptions may impede enrollment into clinical trials: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Nethanel Asher; Ari Raphael; Ido Wolf; Sharon Pelles; Ravit Geva
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 4.615

6.  Improving understanding of clinical trial procedures among low literacy populations: an intervention within a microbicide trial in Malawi.

Authors:  Paul M Ndebele; Douglas Wassenaar; Esther Munalula; Francis Masiye
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2012-11-08       Impact factor: 2.652

7.  Patient information leaflets (PILs) for UK randomised controlled trials: a feasibility study exploring whether they contain information to support decision making about trial participation.

Authors:  Katie Gillies; Wan Huang; Zoë Skea; Jamie Brehaut; Seonaidh Cotton
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 2.279

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.