BACKGROUND: Although the informed consent process is supposed to help potential research participants make informed and voluntary decisions about participating in research, little is known about how participants react to language in the informed consent document and whether their reactions are related to their willingness to enroll in clinical trials. We examined the relationship between patients' reactions to standard informed consent language and their willingness to participate in a hypothetical clinical trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: We simulated the consent process for a hypothetical cardiology clinical trial with 470 patients in an outpatient cardiovascular medicine clinic at a large academic medical center. We analyzed the spontaneous comments and questions that participants made during the interviews about each section of the informed consent document. Few participants made positive comments. Participants made the most negative comments about the sections on risks, study purpose or protocol, and payment for injury. Having a negative reaction to any section was associated with a lower likelihood of participating in the clinical trial. Using a multivariable model, we found that negative reactions in the patient rights, financial disclosure, and confidentiality sections predicted willingness to participate (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing elements of informed consent that elicit questions and concerns from potential research participants may help investigators design clinical research trials and model language in a way that reduces concerns or increases participant understanding, thereby enhancing informed consent for research.
BACKGROUND: Although the informed consent process is supposed to help potential research participants make informed and voluntary decisions about participating in research, little is known about how participants react to language in the informed consent document and whether their reactions are related to their willingness to enroll in clinical trials. We examined the relationship between patients' reactions to standard informed consent language and their willingness to participate in a hypothetical clinical trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: We simulated the consent process for a hypothetical cardiology clinical trial with 470 patients in an outpatient cardiovascular medicine clinic at a large academic medical center. We analyzed the spontaneous comments and questions that participants made during the interviews about each section of the informed consent document. Few participants made positive comments. Participants made the most negative comments about the sections on risks, study purpose or protocol, and payment for injury. Having a negative reaction to any section was associated with a lower likelihood of participating in the clinical trial. Using a multivariable model, we found that negative reactions in the patient rights, financial disclosure, and confidentiality sections predicted willingness to participate (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing elements of informed consent that elicit questions and concerns from potential research participants may help investigators design clinical research trials and model language in a way that reduces concerns or increases participant understanding, thereby enhancing informed consent for research.
Authors: Kevin P Weinfurt; Jennifer S Allsbrook; Joëlle Y Friedman; Michaela A Dinan; Mark A Hall; Kevin A Schulman; Jeremy Sugarman Journal: IRB Date: 2007 Jan-Feb
Authors: David Armstrong; Eva Kline-Rogers; Sandeep M Jani; Edward B Goldman; Jianming Fang; Debabrata Mukherjee; Brahmajee K Nallamothu; Kim A Eagle Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2005-05-23