Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 7382056

How readable are subject consent forms?

Abstract

A consent to treatment form provides required information that a patient may use to give intelligent, informed consent to proposed treatment. This study applied two standard techniques to assess the degree to which 60 informed consent forms from five national cancer clinical trial groups were readable and understandable by patients. The forms were found slightly less difficult to comprehend than medical journals but substantially more difficult than comparable materials from the popular press. Three of four passages describing treatment methods, procedures, discomforts, and risks required a college level or greater reading ability to comprehend. Informed consent documents may not be understood by a substantial portion of patients who sign them. The very regulations designed to ensure a patient's informed cooperation with treatment may inadvertently lead to forms that are so complex as to make informed cooperation virtually impossible.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G R Morrow. 1980-07-04. How readable are subject consent forms?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7382056/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Erroneous and unsatisfactory filling in of drug charts--a potential source of medication error].

BACKGROUND: Medication errors may have serious consequences for patients and erroneous drug charts represent one of several causes of error. As part of a quality assurance survey, we studied whether user documentation on the charts was in accordance with the guidelines for chart keeping. MATERIAL AND METHODS: On the same day, the drug charts of all hospitalized patients (n = 401) were copied and a representative sample of 207 charts was reviewed. RESULTS: 15 charts had no prescriptions; 14 of the remaining 192 charts (7 %) were correctly filled in. 152 charts (79 %) had deviations that we considered might pose only minor potential health risk; 26 (14 %) had deviations implying potential risk. No charts had deviations considered to pose major risk. INTERPRETATION: Several deviations from the guidelines were found and better training is needed; we recommend standardisation of drug charts and guidelines.

Documentation↗