Michelle Lally1, Richard Goldsworthy2, Moussa Sarr3, Jessica Kahn4, Larry Brown5, Ligia Peralta6, Gregory Zimet7. 1. Alpert Medical School of Brown University and the Lifespan Hospital System, Providence, Rhode Island. Electronic address: mlally@lifespan.org. 2. Academic Edge, Bloomington, Indiana. 3. Westat, Rockville, Maryland. 4. University of Cincinnati College of Medicine and Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio. 5. Alpert Medical School of Brown University and the Lifespan Hospital System, Providence, Rhode Island. 6. University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 7. Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Abstract
PURPOSE:Placebo and randomization are important concepts that must be understood before youth can safely participate in HIV vaccine studies or other biomedical trials for HIV prevention. These concepts are central to the phenomenon of preventive misconception that may be associated with an increase in risk behavior among study participants related to mistaken beliefs. Persuasive messaging, traditionally used in the field of marketing, could enhance educational efforts associated with randomized clinical trials. METHODS: Two educational brochures were designed to increase knowledge about HIV vaccine clinical trials via one- and two-sided persuasive messaging. Through the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network, 120 youth were enrolled, administered a mock HIV vaccine trial consent, and then randomized to receive either no supplemental information or one of the two brochures. RESULTS: The two-sided brochure group in which common clinical trial misconceptions were acknowledged and then refuted had significantly higher scores on knowledge of randomization and interpretation of side effects than the consent-only control group, and the willingness to participate in an HIV vaccine trial was not decreased with the use of this brochure. CONCLUSION: Two-sided persuasive messaging improves understanding of the concepts of randomization and placebo among youth who would consider participating in an HIV vaccine trial. Further evaluation of this approach should be considered for at-risk youth participating in an actual trial of a biomedical intervention for HIV prevention.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Placebo and randomization are important concepts that must be understood before youth can safely participate in HIV vaccine studies or other biomedical trials for HIV prevention. These concepts are central to the phenomenon of preventive misconception that may be associated with an increase in risk behavior among study participants related to mistaken beliefs. Persuasive messaging, traditionally used in the field of marketing, could enhance educational efforts associated with randomized clinical trials. METHODS: Two educational brochures were designed to increase knowledge about HIV vaccine clinical trials via one- and two-sided persuasive messaging. Through the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network, 120 youth were enrolled, administered a mock HIV vaccine trial consent, and then randomized to receive either no supplemental information or one of the two brochures. RESULTS: The two-sided brochure group in which common clinical trial misconceptions were acknowledged and then refuted had significantly higher scores on knowledge of randomization and interpretation of side effects than the consent-only control group, and the willingness to participate in an HIV vaccine trial was not decreased with the use of this brochure. CONCLUSION: Two-sided persuasive messaging improves understanding of the concepts of randomization and placebo among youth who would consider participating in an HIV vaccine trial. Further evaluation of this approach should be considered for at-risk youth participating in an actual trial of a biomedical intervention for HIV prevention.
Authors: Angela Fagerlin; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Peter A Ubel; Aleksandra Jankovic; Holly A Derry; Dylan M Smith Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2007-07-19 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: Ahsan M Arozullah; Paul R Yarnold; Charles L Bennett; Robert C Soltysik; Michael S Wolf; Rosario M Ferreira; Shoou-Yih D Lee; Stacey Costello; Adil Shakir; Caroline Denwood; Fred B Bryant; Terry Davis Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-11 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Andreia B Alexander; Mary A Ott; Michelle A Lally; Kevin Sniecinski; Alyne Baker; Gregory D Zimet Journal: Vaccine Date: 2015-01-30 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Jeremy Sugarman; Li Lin; Jared M Baeten; Thesla Palanee-Phillips; Elizabeth R Brown; Flavia Matovu Kiweewa; Nyaradzo M Mgodi; Gonasagrie Nair; Samantha Siva; Damon M Seils; Kevin P Weinfurt Journal: AJOB Empir Bioeth Date: 2019-04-19
Authors: Celia B Fisher; Miriam R Arbeit; Melissa S Dumont; Kathryn Macapagal; Brian Mustanski Journal: J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 1.742
Authors: Marilyn E Coors; Kristen M Raymond; Christian J Hopfer; Joseph Sakai; Shannon K McWilliams; Susan Young; Susan K Mikulich-Gilbertson Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Peter A Newman; Clara Rubincam; Catherine Slack; Zaynab Essack; Venkatesan Chakrapani; Deng-Min Chuang; Suchon Tepjan; Murali Shunmugam; Surachet Roungprakhon; Carmen Logie; Jennifer Koen; Graham Lindegger Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Clinton Rautenbach; Graham Lindegger; Catherine Slack; Melissa Wallace; Peter Newman Journal: J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 1.742
Authors: Catherine Slack; Siya Thabethe; Graham Lindegger; Limba Matandika; Peter A Newman; Philippa Kerr; Doug Wassenaar; Surita Roux; Linda-Gail Bekker Journal: J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics Date: 2016-11-09 Impact factor: 1.742