Literature DB >> 19716887

Informed consent: how much and what do patients understand?

Matthew E Falagas1, Ioanna P Korbila, Konstantina P Giannopoulou, Barbara K Kondilis, George Peppas.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the degree of patients' understanding of several aspects of the informed consent process for surgery and clinical research.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed (1961-2006) to identify relevant articles.
RESULTS: We retrieved 23 and 30 eligible for inclusion articles regarding informed consent for surgery and clinical research, respectively. Regarding surgery, adequate overall understanding of the information provided and of the risks associated with surgery was shown in 6 of 21 (29%) and 5 of 14 (36%) studies providing relevant data, respectively. Regarding clinical research, adequate understanding of the aim of the study, the process of randomization, voluntarism, withdrawal, and the risks and the benefits of treatment was shown in 14 of 26 (54%), 4 of 8 (50%), 7 of 15 (47%), 7 of 16 (44%), 8 of 16 (50%), and 4 of 7 (57%) of studies providing relevant data, respectively. Satisfaction by the amount of the given information was shown in 7 of 12 (58%) studies involving surgery and 12 of 15 (80%) studies involving clinical research.
CONCLUSIONS: Further attention should be drawn on enhancing patients' understanding regarding several components of the informed consent process for surgery and clinical research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19716887     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.02.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  86 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

Review 2.  Advancing informed consent for vulnerable populations.

Authors:  Willliam J Heerman; Richard O White; Shari L Barkin
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 7.124

3.  Informed consent and clinical trials: where is the placebo effect?

Authors:  C R Blease; F L Bishop; T J Kaptchuk
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-02-03

4.  Informed consent form challenges for genetic research in a developing Arab country with high risk for genetic disease.

Authors:  Satish Chandrasekhar Nair; Halah Ibrahim
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-09-18       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 5.  Approaches to assessing the benefits and harms of medical devices for application in surgery.

Authors:  Stefan Sauerland; Anne Catharina Brockhaus; Naomi Fujita-Rohwerder; Stefano Saad
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2014-02-16       Impact factor: 3.445

6.  The Development of a Communication Tool to Facilitate the Cancer Trial Recruitment Process and Increase Research Literacy among Underrepresented Populations.

Authors:  Samantha Torres; Erika E de la Riva; Laura S Tom; Marla L Clayman; Chirisse Taylor; Xinqi Dong; Melissa A Simon
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.037

7.  Effect of the informed consent process on anxiety and comprehension of patients undergoing esophageal and gastrointestinal surgery.

Authors:  Simonetta Betti; Andrea Sironi; Greta Saino; Cristian Ricci; Luigi Bonavina
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-04-12       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  The Optimistic Bias and Illusions of Control in Clinical Research.

Authors:  Lynn A Jansen
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr

9.  A randomized study of multimedia informational aids for research on medical practices: Implications for informed consent.

Authors:  Stephanie A Kraft; Melissa Constantine; David Magnus; Kathryn M Porter; Sandra Soo-Jin Lee; Michael Green; Nancy E Kass; Benjamin S Wilfond; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 2.486

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.