Literature DB >> 28949842

Perspectives of IRB chairs on the informed consent process.

Eugene I Kane1, Joseph J Gallo2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Questions have been raised by researchers and ethics committees about whether human research subjects comprehend study participation when signing a research consent form.
METHODS: To determine existing beliefs about the informed consent review process, impediments to shorter consent, and augmented/alternative consent methods, a survey of institutional review board (IRB) chairpersons was conducted.
RESULTS: IRB chairs expressed concern with (but do not often assess) the length, complexity, and reading level of the consent form or participant comprehension. IRB chairs reported varied (but generally low) familiarity, acceptance, and use of possible solutions and alternatives.
CONCLUSIONS: Best practice standards should be developed for (1) assessing consent form reading level; (2) measuring and monitoring participant comprehension; (3) alternative consent methods and enhancements; and (4) electronic signatures.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IRB; consent comprehension; consent reading level; electronic consent; enhanced consent; informed consent; multimedia consent; participant comprehension

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28949842      PMCID: PMC6167056          DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2016.1253628

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth        ISSN: 2329-4515


  24 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.  Viewpoint: IRBs, hospital ethics committees, and the need for "translational informed consent".

Authors:  Thomas May; J M Craig; Ryan Spellecy
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  Improving informed consent in clinical trials: successful piloting of a decision aid.

Authors:  Ilona Juraskova; Phyllis Butow; Anna-Lena Lopez; Margaret Seccombe; Fran Boyle; Nicole McCarthy; John F Forbes
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-04-10       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Satisfying the needs of Japanese cancer patients: a comparative study of detailed and standard informed consent documents.

Authors:  Keiko Sato; Toru Watanabe; Noriyuki Katsumata; Tosiya Sato; Yasuo Ohashi
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 2.486

5.  Do informed consent documents for cancer trials do what they should? A study of manifest and latent functions.

Authors:  Natalie Armstrong; Mary Dixon-Woods; Anne Thomas; Gill Rusk; Carolyn Tarrant
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  2012-03-22

6.  Enhancement of surgical informed consent by addition of repeat back: a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Aaron S Fink; Allan V Prochazka; William G Henderson; Debra Bartenfeld; Carsie Nyirenda; Alexandra Webb; David H Berger; Kamal Itani; Thomas Whitehill; James Edwards; Mark Wilson; Cynthia Karsonovich; Patricia Parmelee
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Understanding and retention of trial-related information among participants in a clinical trial after completing the informed consent process.

Authors:  Fernanda Mexas; Anne Efron; Ronir Raggio Luiz; Michelle Cailleaux-Cezar; Richard E Chaisson; Marcus B Conde
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2013-12-02       Impact factor: 2.486

8.  The use of high definition video modules for delivery of informed consent and wound care education in the Mohs Surgery Unit.

Authors:  Michael Migden; Arianne Chavez-Frazier; Tri Nguyen
Journal:  Semin Cutan Med Surg       Date:  2008-03

9.  Improvement in surgical consent with a preoperative multimedia patient education tool: a pilot study.

Authors:  Ben M Beamond; Andrew D Beischer; James W Brodsky; Hamish Leslie
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 2.827

10.  Effect of a study map intended to support informed consent in transplant research.

Authors:  Megan A Foradori; Marie T Nolan
Journal:  Prog Transplant       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.187

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Comparing human and mouse salivary glands: A practice guide for salivary researchers.

Authors:  C L Maruyama; M M Monroe; J P Hunt; L Buchmann; O J Baker
Journal:  Oral Dis       Date:  2018-04-24       Impact factor: 3.511

2.  Shortened consent forms for genome-wide sequencing: Parent and provider perspectives.

Authors:  Emma C Hitchcock; Causes Study; Alison M Elliott
Journal:  Mol Genet Genomic Med       Date:  2020-05-08       Impact factor: 2.183

3.  Implementation of Electronic Informed Consent in Biomedical Research and Stakeholders' Perspectives: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Evelien De Sutter; Drieda Zaçe; Stefania Boccia; Maria Luisa Di Pietro; David Geerts; Pascal Borry; Isabelle Huys
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 5.428

4.  Assessing Parent Decisions About Child Participation in a Behavioral Health Intervention Study and Utility of Informed Consent Forms.

Authors:  Stephanie A Kraft; Kathryn M Porter; Devan M Duenas; Erin Sullivan; Maya Rowland; Brian E Saelens; Benjamin S Wilfond; Seema K Shah
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2020-07-01
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.