Literature DB >> 29679770

Easy-to-Read Informed Consent Form for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Clinical Trials: Results from the Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network 1205 Study.

Ryan Spellecy1, Sergey Tarima1, Ellen Denzen2, Heather Moore3, Sunil Abhyankar4, Peter Dawson5, Amy Foley2, Iris Gersten5, Mitchell Horwitz6, Lensa Idossa3, Steven Joffe7, Naynesh Kamani8, Roberta King3, Aleksandr Lazaryan9, Lawrence Morris10, Mary M Horowitz11, Navneet S Majhail12.   

Abstract

Because of the complexity of hematopoietic cell transplant trial treatments, informed consent forms are often long and difficult to read. We evaluated a 2-column easy-to-read informed consent (ETRIC) form that incorporates elements of health literacy and readability in participants and centers participating in Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN) clinical trials. In a randomized study 198 adult patients from 25 centers potentially eligible to participate in 4 BMT CTN interventional trials were randomized to the ETRIC form or a standard consent form for that trial. Both forms were written at no more than an eighth-grade reading level. The primary endpoint was objective comprehension score on the Quality of Informed Consent, part A (QuIC-A) instrument. In a parallel evaluation study, 2 moderators conducted semistructured interviews of 49 investigators, research staff, and institutional review board (IRB) members at 9 BMT CTN trial sites. The mean QuIC-A scores were comparable in 152 patients (77%) assessable for the primary endpoint (ETRIC form, 80.5; standard form, 81.8; P = .37). In regression analysis there was no significant association between the consent type and QuIC-A score. In the evaluation study dominant themes identified on qualitative analyses included general comfort and willingness to use the ETRIC template and that its formatting and layout enhancements would offer additional value to research participants, investigators, and IRBs. IRB language preferences and requirements, length, and prior experience with alternative consent formats were perceived as barriers. Among patients considering participation in BMT CTN clinical trials, the formatting enhancements of the ETRIC form did not alter comprehension of the trial. Despite local challenges to implementation, trial sites generally viewed the ETRIC form favorably and expressed willingness to use it over standard consent form.
Copyright © 2018 The American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network: hematopoietic cell transplantation; Clinical trials; Informed consent; Research subjects

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29679770      PMCID: PMC6193865          DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.04.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Blood Marrow Transplant        ISSN: 1083-8791            Impact factor:   5.742


  24 in total

1.  Therapeutic misconception and the appreciation of risks in clinical trials.

Authors:  Charles W Lidz; Paul S Appelbaum; Thomas Grisso; Michelle Renaud
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  "Entering a Clinical Trial: Is it Right for You?": a randomized study of The Clinical Trials Video and its impact on the informed consent process.

Authors:  Brianna Hoffner; Susan Bauer-Wu; Suzanne Hitchcock-Bryan; Mark Powell; Andrew Wolanski; Steven Joffe
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-08-25       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Consent documents for oncology trials: does anybody read these things?

Authors:  S Michael Sharp
Journal:  Am J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.339

4.  The length of consent documents in oncological trials is doubled in twenty years.

Authors:  O Berger; B H Grønberg; K Sand; S Kaasa; J H Loge
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 32.976

5.  Patients' unrealistic hopes for cancer trial benefits may hinder consent.

Authors:  Bridget M Kuehn
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-03-23       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  The Deaconess Informed Consent Comprehension Test: an assessment tool for clinical research subjects.

Authors:  C K Miller; D C O'Donnell; H R Searight; R A Barbarash
Journal:  Pharmacotherapy       Date:  1996 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.705

7.  Quality of informed consent: a new measure of understanding among research subjects.

Authors:  S Joffe; E F Cook; P D Cleary; J W Clark; J C Weeks
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2001-01-17       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Telephone-based nursing intervention improves the effectiveness of the informed consent process in cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; E Visser-Pol; G H Leenhouts; M J Muller; A C van der Schot; F S van Dam; R B Keus; C C Koning; W W ten Bokkel Huinink; J A van Dongen; R Dubbelman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 9.  Barriers to participation in clinical trials of cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review of patient-reported factors.

Authors:  Edward J Mills; Dugald Seely; Beth Rachlis; Lauren Griffith; Ping Wu; Kumanan Wilson; Peter Ellis; James R Wright
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 41.316

10.  Health literacy and self-efficacy for participating in colorectal cancer screening: The role of information processing.

Authors:  Christian von Wagner; Claudia Semmler; Anna Good; Jane Wardle
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2009-04-21
View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Building a Fit for Purpose Clinical Trials Infrastructure to Accelerate the Assessment of Novel Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Strategies and Cellular Immunotherapies.

Authors:  Steven M Devine; Mary M Horowitz
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 2.  A Scoping Review on How to Make Hospitals health Literate Healthcare Organizations.

Authors:  Patrizio Zanobini; Chiara Lorini; Alberto Baldasseroni; Claudia Dellisanti; Guglielmo Bonaccorsi
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 3.390

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.