Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “informed consent”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

Minimal-risk waiver of informed consent and exception from informed consent (Final Rule) studies at institutional review boards nationwide.

BACKGROUND: Federal regulations allow waiver of informed consent for minimal-risk research (waiver). More than minimal-risk emergency research is allowed with an exception from informed consent (EFIC) under specific guidelines called the Final Rule. Performance of research without consent is controversial; however, chances for public health improvements are significant. OBJECTIVES: 1) To describe the number and demographics of academic medical institutions that have reviewed and approved minimal-risk waiver and EFIC studies; 2) to describe associations between National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding percentile and whether an academic medical institution reviews EFIC studies; and 3) to describe associations between geographic region and review of EFIC studies, and the interaction of region and NIH funding percentile with review of EFIC studies. The hypothesis was that schools with a higher NIH funding percentile (more funding) reviewed more EFIC studies research, and that this effect did not vary based on region. METHODS: This was an e-mail and telephone survey of all 122 MD-degree-granting medical schools in the continental United States. Descriptive data were collected on the number of schools reviewing and approving EFIC research. Sites were split into those that have reviewed EFIC studies and those that have not. A multivariable logistic regression examined the effects of 1) funding percentile and 2) region (Northeast, North Central, Southeast, and West) on the likelihood of EFIC study reviews at the sites. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were determined. RESULTS: Ninety-eight of 118 eligible institutional review boards (IRBs) (83%) responded. Ninety-nine percent (97/98) approved waiver studies; 51% (50/98) had reviewed and approved EFIC studies. Academic medical institutions with higher funding percentile were significantly more likely to have reviewed/approved EFIC studies (interaction p = 0.01) in all regions except the Northeast, where higher funding percentile was associated with IRBs significantly less likely to have reviewed/approved EFIC studies (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.81). CONCLUSIONS: Almost all medical school IRBs review minimal-risk waiver studies. About half of IRBs at medical schools have reviewed and approved an EFIC study. The higher the NIH funding percentile (more NIH funding), the more likely a site has reviewed EFIC studies, except in the Northeast region.

Academic Medical Centers↗

Use of a modified informed consent process among vulnerable patients: a descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about patient characteristics associated with comprehension of consent information, and whether modifications to the consent process can promote understanding. OBJECTIVE: To describe a modified research consent process, and determine whether literacy and demographic characteristics are associated with understanding consent information. DESIGN: Descriptive study of a modified consent process: consent form (written at a sixth-grade level) read to participants, combined with 7 comprehension questions and targeted education, repeated until comprehension achieved (teach-to-goal). PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and four ethnically diverse subjects, aged > or = 50, consenting for a trial to improve the forms used for advance directives. MEASUREMENTS: Number of passes through the consent process required to achieve complete comprehension. Literacy assessed in English and Spanish with the Short Form Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (scores 0 to 36). RESULTS: Participants had a mean age of 61 years and 40% had limited literacy (s-TOHFLA<23). Only 28% of subjects answered all comprehension questions correctly on the first pass. After adjustment, lower literacy (P=.04) and being black (P=.03) were associated with requiring more passes through the consent process. Not speaking English as a primary language was associated with requiring more passes through the consent process in bivariate analyses (P<.01), but not in multivariable analyses (P>.05). After the second pass, most subjects (80%) answered all questions correctly. With a teach-to-goal strategy, 98% of participants who engaged in the consent process achieved complete comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: Lower literacy and minority status are important determinants of understanding consent information. Using a modified consent process, little additional education was required to achieve complete comprehension, regardless of literacy or language barriers.

Aged↗

The role of the consent document in informed consent for pediatric leukemia trials.

PURPOSE: To examine both the use of the consent document during the informed consent process for pediatric leukemia clinical trials, as well as relationships between the use of the document and parental understanding of essential elements of informed consent. METHODS: Participants included 140 parents of children diagnosed with pediatric leukemia. Informed consent conferences in which randomized clinical trials were discussed were observed, audiotaped, and coded for specific behaviors. Parents were also interviewed within 48 h of their participation in informed consent conferences. RESULTS: Observations revealed that 74% of cases included explanation of consent documents during consent conferences. Parents who reported that they read the consent document were more likely to understand differences between the clinical trial and off study therapy and were more likely to understand the right to withdraw. Reading of the consent document was not associated with understanding of voluntariness. In comparison to racial/ethnic majority parents, racial/ethnic minority parents were less likely to report that they read the consent document, understand voluntariness or the right to withdraw, and were less likely to be able to distinguish between the clinical trial and off study therapy. Low SES was associated with a lower probability of reading the consent document and being able to distinguish between clinical trials and off study therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Attention to the importance of reading the consent document and improving communication during consent conferences is likely to enhance understanding of essential elements of informed consent.

Adolescent↗

Informed consent--suggested procedures for informed consent for unrelated haematopoietic stem cell donors at various stages of recruitment, donor evaluation, and donor workup.

The Ethics Working Group of the World Marrow Donor Association (WMDA) was established to address the increasing and complex number of ethical issues surrounding unrelated haematopoietic stem cell donation where the selected donor and recipient reside in different countries. This paper considers the topic of informed donor consent, but recognises that the recommendations contained within the paper may be subject to cultural variances in interpretation, and to adjustment to meet the legal requirements of individual countries. Nevertheless, the extent of international cooperation establishes sufficient common denominators for the recommendations to be widely adhered to in the interests of best practice.

Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation↗

[Informed consent, what information is left after a therapeutic trial?].

In order to evaluate the outcome of information given to patients included in a therapeutic trial after having signed a consent form, 77 patients (68 men, 9 women with an average age of 57.9 years) included in the IMPACT study (multicenter, randomised, double-blind protocol, the main objective of which was to assess the antiarrhythmic effect of oral administration of delayed action mexiletine in patients with a recent myocardial infarction), answered a questionnaire of 85 items. The quantity and degree of comprehension of the recalled information at the end of the trial were appreciated from the replies to 13 questions based on the definition or understanding of the most important details of the consent form and on a comprehension score with a maximum value of 14 points. The global quantity of information recalled after an interval ranging from 5 to 21 months was estimated at 60% of the information provided but the recall was not uniform according to the different elements of the consent form: the aim of the study, the concept of placebo, the nature of the active treatment, the randomisation and possible side effects were only correctly apprehended by 40 to 50% of patients: the type of patient included, the duration of the trial, the content of the gelules, the division between treatment/placebo and the concept of double-blind were known to 50 to 75% of participants: the sites of the test centres, the possibility of unmasking the "blind" are of withdrawing from the trial were correctly understood in 75 to 90% of cases. The global average comprehension score was 8.7.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗