Literature DB >> 1932901

Informed consent: study of quality of information given to participants in a clinical trial.

N Lynöe1, M Sandlund, G Dahlqvist, L Jacobsson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the participants in a clinical trial had perceived adequate information about the trial according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki.
DESIGN: About 18 months after the end of a gynaecological clinical trial the participants received a questionnaire by post, which focused on the quality of the information given to them before entering the trial. Neither researchers nor participants were aware in advance that the trial would become the subject of this follow up investigation.
SETTING: Eight different centres in Sweden.
SUBJECTS: 43 women out of the 53 who completed the trial (mean (range) age 23 (16 to 35) years) returned the questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adequacy of the information (based on requirements of the Declaration of Helsinki) to enable the following: understanding of the aims of the study; awareness of what participation meant; and awareness of the possibility of withdrawing from participation at any time. Motives for agreeing to participate, and a subjective evaluation of the given information were also recorded.
RESULTS: All but one of the participants had been aware that they were taking part in a research project. Five women stated that they had not been aware that a second laparoscopy was performed only for research reasons. Seven women reported that they had not been aware of the meaning of participating in the project and 17 that they had had no information about the possibility of withdrawing from the study whenever they wanted. In the subjective rating 22 women considered the information given as good or very good. There was a systematic variation in the quality of the given information among the eight centres.
CONCLUSION: Although all but one of the participants had been aware that they were taking part in a clinical trial, the quality of the information understood and recalled by participants varied, and in many cases clearly did not meet the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki. Variations among centres in participants' perception of information suggest that deficiencies in perception may be caused by informers rather than the participants.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Declaration of Helsinki; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1932901      PMCID: PMC1671066          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.303.6803.610

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  5 in total

1.  Randomised comparison of procedures for obtaining informed consent in clinical trials of treatment for cancer.

Authors:  R J Simes; M H Tattersall; A S Coates; D Raghavan; H J Solomon; H Smartt
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1986-10-25

2.  Competency to consent to research: a psychiatric overview.

Authors:  P S Appelbaum; L H Roth
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1982-08

3.  Informed consent -- why are its goals imperfectly realized?

Authors:  B R Cassileth; R V Zupkis; K Sutton-Smith; V March
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1980-04-17       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Informed consent, memory and age.

Authors:  H A Taub
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  1980-12

5.  The elderly patient and informed consent. Empirical findings.

Authors:  B Stanley; J Guido; M Stanley; D Shortell
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1984-09-14       Impact factor: 56.272

  5 in total
  68 in total

1.  Practical communication guidance to improve phase 1 informed consent conversations and decision-making in pediatric oncology.

Authors:  Liza-Marie Johnson; Angela C Leek; Dennis Drotar; Robert B Noll; Susan R Rheingold; Eric D Kodish; Justin N Baker
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Is informed consent possible in acute myocardial infarction?

Authors:  B A Foëx
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 3.  The quality of informed consent: mapping the landscape. A review of empirical data from developing and developed countries.

Authors:  Amulya Mandava; Christine Pace; Benjamin Campbell; Ezekiel Emanuel; Christine Grady
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 2.903

4.  Informed consent.

Authors:  P Robinson; M Vandenburg; I Dews
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-11-02

5.  The new European regulation on pediatric medicines: safety and ethics perspectives.

Authors:  Antje Neubert; Claire Planner; Noel Cranswick
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.022

Review 6.  The ethics of randomised controlled trials from the perspectives of patients, the public, and healthcare professionals.

Authors:  S J Edwards; R J Lilford; J Hewison
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-10-31

7.  Experienced consent in geriatrics research: a new method to optimize the capacity to consent in frail elderly subjects.

Authors:  M G Rikkert; J H van den Bercken; H A ten Have; W H Hoefnagels
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 8.  How to do it. Get patients' consent to enter clinical trials.

Authors:  E Wager; P J Tooley; M B Emanuel; S F Wood
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-09-16

9.  Informed consent, parental awareness, and reasons for participating in a randomised controlled study.

Authors:  M van Stuijvenberg; M H Suur; S de Vos; G C Tjiang; E W Steyerberg; G Derksen-Lubsen; H A Moll
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 3.791

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.