Literature DB >> 25676061

Improving the Proficiency of Research Consent Administrators.

Elaine L Larson1, Rachel Lally2, Gabriella Foe3, Gabriela Joaquin4, Dodi D Meyer5, Elizabeth G Cohn6,7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development and testing of a module to improve consent administrators' skills when obtaining research consent from culturally and linguistically diverse and low literacy populations.
DESIGN: Development and psychometric testing of video module including community vignettes.
METHODS: Following initial content, face, and construct validity testing by experts, a field trial was conducted with pre- and postknowledge tests and satisfaction surveys completed by 112 consent administrators.
RESULTS: Mean score out of a possible 10 on pretest was 8.6 (±standard deviation [SD], 1.55) and on posttest was 9.1 (±SD, 1.2; paired t-test 95% confidence interval of difference: -0.18 to -0.88; two-tailed p = 0.003). The average years of experience with obtaining consent was 6.42 years (range: 0-35), but years of experience was not significantly associated with either pre- or posttest scores (p = 0.82 and 0.44, respectively). Most user evaluations were positive, although suggestions for improvements were made.
CONCLUSION: Although pretest scores were relatively high, training needs of research consent administrators for consenting diverse and low literacy populations may be unmet. We urge that institutional review boards, researchers, policymakers, educators, and bioethicists address the training needs of research consent administrators and we offer this training module as one potential resource and adjunct to such training.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomedical ethics; clinical research; health literacy; informed consent

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25676061      PMCID: PMC4531103          DOI: 10.1111/cts.12252

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Transl Sci        ISSN: 1752-8054            Impact factor:   4.689


  7 in total

Review 1.  Improving the informed consent process for research subjects with low literacy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Leonardo Tamariz; Ana Palacio; Mauricio Robert; Erin N Marcus
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2012-07-11       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Consent administrator training to reduce disparities in research participation.

Authors:  Elaine L Larson; Elizabeth Gross Cohn; Dodi D Meyer; Bernadette Boden-Albala
Journal:  J Nurs Scholarsh       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.176

3.  Measuring the process and quality of informed consent for clinical research: development and testing.

Authors:  Elizabeth Gross Cohn; Haomiao Jia; Winifred Chapman Smith; Katherine Erwin; Elaine L Larson
Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.172

Review 4.  Essential elements of communication in medical encounters: the Kalamazoo consensus statement.

Authors:  G Makoul
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 6.893

5.  A survey of IRB process in 68 U.S. hospitals.

Authors:  Elaine Larson; Tiffany Bratts; Jack Zwanziger; Patricia Stone
Journal:  J Nurs Scholarsh       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.176

6.  Changes in the institutional review board submission process for multicenter research over 6 years.

Authors:  Monika Pogorzelska; Patricia W Stone; Elizabeth Gross Cohn; Elaine Larson
Journal:  Nurs Outlook       Date:  2010 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.250

Review 7.  Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials.

Authors:  Adam Nishimura; Jantey Carey; Patricia J Erwin; Jon C Tilburt; M Hassan Murad; Jennifer B McCormick
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 2.652

  7 in total
  1 in total

1.  Assessing usefulness and researcher satisfaction with consent form templates.

Authors:  Elaine L Larson; Alan Teller; Alejandra N Aguirre; Jhia Jackson; Dodi Meyer
Journal:  J Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2017-08
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.