39
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      An effective multisource informed consent procedure for research and clinical practice: an observational study of patient understanding and awareness of their roles as research stakeholders in a cancer biobank

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Efforts to improve patients’ understanding of their own medical treatments or research in which they are involved are progressing, especially with regard to informed consent procedures. We aimed to design a multisource informed consent procedure that is easily adaptable to both clinical and research applications, and to evaluate its effectiveness in terms of understanding and awareness, even in less educated patients.

          Methods

          We designed a multisource informed consent procedure for patients’ enrolment in a Cancer Institute Biobank (CRO-Biobank). From October 2009 to July 2011, a total of 550 cancer patients admitted to the Centro di Riferimento Oncologico IRCCS Aviano, who agreed to contribute to its biobank, were consecutively enrolled. Participants were asked to answer a self-administered questionnaire aim at exploring their understanding of biobanks and their needs for information on this topic, before and after study participation. Chi-square tests were performed on the questionnaire answers, according to gender or education.

          Results

          Of the 430 patients who returned the questionnaire, only 36.5% knew what a biobank was before participating in the study. Patients with less formal education were less informed by some sources (the Internet, newspapers, magazines, and our Institute). The final assessment test, taken after the multisource informed consent procedure, showed more than 95% correct answers. The information received was judged to be very or fairly understandable in almost all cases. More than 95% of patients were aware of participating in a biobank project, and gave helping cancer research (67.5%), moral obligation, and supporting cancer care as main reasons for their involvement.

          Conclusions

          Our multisource informed consent information system allowed a high rate of understanding and awareness of study participation, even among less-educated participants, and could be an effective and easy-to-apply model for others to consider to contribute to a well-informed decision making process in several fields, from clinical practice to research.

          Further studies are needed to explore the effects on the study comprehension by each source of information, and by other sources suggested by participants in the questionnaire.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review.

          Available data suggest that prospective research participants may frequently not understand information disclosed to them in the informed consent process. Little is known about how understanding can be improved. To review research on interventions to improve research participants' understanding of information disclosed in the informed consent process. A search of MEDLINE was performed using the terms informed consent and clinical research and informed consent and (comprehension or understanding) from 1966 to March 2004 , which included randomized controlled trials, longitudinal trials, and controlled trials with nonrandom allocation that compared the understanding of research participants who had undergone only a standard informed consent process to that of participants who had received an intervention to improve their understanding. A comprehensive bibliography of empirical research on informed consent published in January 1999 was also reviewed, as were personal files and all issues of the journals IRB and Controlled Clinical Trials. Study design, quality criteria, population characteristics, interventions, and outcomes for each trial were extracted. The statistical significance of the interventions' effects on understanding were noted, as were mean scores for understanding for each group of each trial. For those trials that measured the secondary outcomes of satisfaction and willingness to enroll, results were also summarized. Thirty studies described 42 trials that met inclusion criteria. Of 12 trials of multimedia interventions, 3 showed significant improvement in understanding. Of 15 trials of enhanced consent forms, 6 showed significant improvement in understanding (all P<.05), but 5 of 6 trials were of limited quality, casting doubt on their practical relevance. Of 5 trials of extended discussion, 3 showed significant improvement in understanding (all P<.001) and 2 showed trends toward improvement (P=.054 and P=.08). Of 5 trials of test/feedback, all showed significant improvement in understanding (all P<.05) but were flawed in that they may have mistaken rote memorization for improvement in understanding. Another 5 trials were put into a miscellaneous category and had varying impact on understanding. Some demographic factors, particularly lower education, were associated with less understanding. Satisfaction and willingness to enroll were never significantly diminished by an intervention . Efforts to improve understanding through the use of multimedia and enhanced consent forms have had only limited success. Having a study team member or a neutral educator spend more time talking one-on-one to study participants appears to be the most effective available way of improving research participants' understanding; however, further research is needed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Informed consent: how much and what do patients understand?

            We sought to evaluate the degree of patients' understanding of several aspects of the informed consent process for surgery and clinical research. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed (1961-2006) to identify relevant articles. We retrieved 23 and 30 eligible for inclusion articles regarding informed consent for surgery and clinical research, respectively. Regarding surgery, adequate overall understanding of the information provided and of the risks associated with surgery was shown in 6 of 21 (29%) and 5 of 14 (36%) studies providing relevant data, respectively. Regarding clinical research, adequate understanding of the aim of the study, the process of randomization, voluntarism, withdrawal, and the risks and the benefits of treatment was shown in 14 of 26 (54%), 4 of 8 (50%), 7 of 15 (47%), 7 of 16 (44%), 8 of 16 (50%), and 4 of 7 (57%) of studies providing relevant data, respectively. Satisfaction by the amount of the given information was shown in 7 of 12 (58%) studies involving surgery and 12 of 15 (80%) studies involving clinical research. Further attention should be drawn on enhancing patients' understanding regarding several components of the informed consent process for surgery and clinical research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research.

              Concerns about privacy may deter people from participating in genetic research. Recruitment and retention of biobank participants requires understanding the nature and magnitude of these concerns. Potential participants in a proposed biobank were asked about their willingness to participate, their privacy concerns, informed consent, and data sharing. A representative survey of 4659 U.S. adults was conducted. Ninety percent of respondents would be concerned about privacy, 56% would be concerned about researchers having their information, and 37% would worry that study data could be used against them. However, 60% would participate in the biobank if asked. Nearly half (48%) would prefer to provide consent once for all research approved by an oversight panel, whereas 42% would prefer to provide consent for each project separately. Although 92% would allow academic researchers to use study data, 80% and 75%, respectively, would grant access to government and industry researchers. Concern about privacy was related to lower willingness to participate only when respondents were told that they would receive $50 for participation and would not receive individual research results back. Among respondents who were told that they would receive $200 or individual research results, privacy concerns were not related to willingness. Survey respondents valued both privacy and participation in biomedical research. Despite pervasive privacy concerns, 60% would participate in a biobank. Assuring research participants that their privacy will be protected to the best of researchers' abilities may increase participants' acceptance of consent for broad research uses of biobank data by a wide range of researchers.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                BMC Med Ethics
                BMC Med Ethics
                BMC Medical Ethics
                BioMed Central
                1472-6939
                2013
                30 July 2013
                : 14
                : 30
                Affiliations
                [1 ]CRO-Biobank, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico, IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
                [2 ]Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico, IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
                [3 ]Division of Pathology, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico, IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
                [4 ]Scientific Directorate, Centro di Riferimento Oncologico, IRCCS, Aviano, Italy
                Article
                1472-6939-14-30
                10.1186/1472-6939-14-30
                3734192
                23899250
                090b6d6d-514a-4d3f-a4f7-3c6242298fa2
                Copyright © 2013 Cervo et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 26 July 2012
                : 17 May 2013
                Categories
                Research Article

                Medicine
                informed consent,patients,understanding,awareness,biobank,patient education,empowerment
                Medicine
                informed consent, patients, understanding, awareness, biobank, patient education, empowerment

                Comments

                Comment on this article