BACKGROUND: Clinical trials are central to pediatric oncology, yet the process and outcomes of informed consent are poorly understood. We evaluated correlates of understanding among parents of pediatric trial participants, and explored differences in the process and outcome of informed consent between parents and a comparison group of adult participants. PROCEDURE: We administered the Quality of Informed Consent (QuIC) to parents of children who were newly enrolled onto a cancer trial. We identified independent correlates of knowledge among parents, and compared parents' knowledge to that of a contemporaneous group of adult participants, using multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: Parents (n = 47) were less likely than adult participants (n = 204) to report having enough time to learn about the trial (64% vs. 87%, P = 0.001) or sufficient opportunity for questions (79% vs. 93%, P = 0.01), and reported lower overall satisfaction with the consent process (71% vs. 90%, P = 0.002). The mean parental knowledge score was 73.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 69.5-77.8, theoretical maximum 100). Knowledge did not differ between parents and adult trial participants. In multivariate analysis, two predictors were significantly associated with higher parent knowledge scores: consent sought by the study's principal investigator (increment 13.6, CI 2.7-24.6) and physician-reported poor prognosis (increment 13.8, 95% CI 5.4-22.1). CONCLUSIONS: Although we observed no differences in knowledge between parents of pediatric cancer trial participants and their adult counterparts, parents report more problems with the informed consent process for their trials. The increased prevalence of problems is likely due to clinical and contextual differences between pediatric and adult trials.
BACKGROUND: Clinical trials are central to pediatric oncology, yet the process and outcomes of informed consent are poorly understood. We evaluated correlates of understanding among parents of pediatric trial participants, and explored differences in the process and outcome of informed consent between parents and a comparison group of adult participants. PROCEDURE: We administered the Quality of Informed Consent (QuIC) to parents of children who were newly enrolled onto a cancer trial. We identified independent correlates of knowledge among parents, and compared parents' knowledge to that of a contemporaneous group of adult participants, using multiple linear regression models. RESULTS: Parents (n = 47) were less likely than adult participants (n = 204) to report having enough time to learn about the trial (64% vs. 87%, P = 0.001) or sufficient opportunity for questions (79% vs. 93%, P = 0.01), and reported lower overall satisfaction with the consent process (71% vs. 90%, P = 0.002). The mean parental knowledge score was 73.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 69.5-77.8, theoretical maximum 100). Knowledge did not differ between parents and adult trial participants. In multivariate analysis, two predictors were significantly associated with higher parent knowledge scores: consent sought by the study's principal investigator (increment 13.6, CI 2.7-24.6) and physician-reported poor prognosis (increment 13.8, 95% CI 5.4-22.1). CONCLUSIONS: Although we observed no differences in knowledge between parents of pediatric cancer trial participants and their adult counterparts, parents report more problems with the informed consent process for their trials. The increased prevalence of problems is likely due to clinical and contextual differences between pediatric and adult trials.
Authors: Ryan Spellecy; Sergey Tarima; Ellen Denzen; Heather Moore; Sunil Abhyankar; Peter Dawson; Amy Foley; Iris Gersten; Mitchell Horwitz; Lensa Idossa; Steven Joffe; Naynesh Kamani; Roberta King; Aleksandr Lazaryan; Lawrence Morris; Mary M Horowitz; Navneet S Majhail Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2018-04-18 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Melissa K Cousino; Stephen J Zyzanski; Amy D Yamokoski; Rebecca A Hazen; Justin N Baker; Robert B Noll; Susan R Rheingold; J Russell Geyer; Stewart C Alexander; Dennis Drotar; Eric D Kodish Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-10-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lamia P Barakat; Evelyn Stevens; Yimei Li; Anne Reilly; Janet A Deatrick; Naomi E Goldstein; Lisa A Schwartz Journal: J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol Date: 2019-04-26 Impact factor: 2.223
Authors: Sarah Scollon; Katie Bergstrom; Robin A Kerstein; Tao Wang; Susan G Hilsenbeck; Uma Ramamurthy; Richard A Gibbs; Christine M Eng; Murali M Chintagumpala; Stacey L Berg; Laurence B McCullough; Amy L McGuire; Sharon E Plon; D Williams Parsons Journal: Genome Med Date: 2014-09-17 Impact factor: 11.117