Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey

被引:456
作者
Joffe, S
Cook, EF
Cleary, PD
Clark, JW
Weeks, JC
机构
[1] Dana Farber Canc Inst, Ctr Outcomes & Policy Res, Dept Paediat Oncol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Dana Farber Canc Inst, Dept Adult Oncol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Childrens Hosp, Dept Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[5] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Div Gen Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[6] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Dept Hlth Care Policy, Boston, MA USA
[7] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Div Hematol Oncol, Boston, MA 02114 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06805-2
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Investigators have to obtain informed consent before enrolling participants in clinical trials. We wanted to measure the quality of understanding among participants in clinical trials of cancer therapies, to identify correlates of increased understanding, and to assess providers' beliefs about clinical research. We also sought evidence of therapeutic misconceptions in participants and providers. Methods We sent a standard questionnaire to 287 adult patients with cancer who had recently enrolled in a clinical trial at one of three affiliated institutions, and surveyed the provider who obtained each patient's consent. Findings 207 of 287 (72%) patients responded. 90% (186) of these respondents were satisfied with the informed consent process and most considered themselves to be well informed. Nevertheless, many did not recognise nonstandard treatment (74%), the potential for incremental risk from participation (63%), the unproven nature of the treatment (70%), the uncertainty of benefits to self (29%), or that trials are done mainly to benefit future patients (25%). In multivariate analysis, increased knowledge was associated with college education, speaking only English at home, use of the US National Cancer Institute consent form template, not signing the consent form at initial discussion, presence of a nurse, and careful reading of the consent form. Only 28 of 61 providers (46%) recognised that the main reason for clinical trials is benefit to future patients. Interpretation Misconceptions about cancer clinical trials are frequent among trial participants, and physician/investigators might share some of these misconceptions. Efforts to educate providers and participants about the underlying goals of clinical trials are needed.
引用
收藏
页码:1772 / 1777
页数:6
相关论文
共 32 条
  • [1] Telephone-based nursing intervention improves the effectiveness of the informed consent process in cancer clinical trials
    Aaronson, NK
    VisserPol, E
    Leenhouts, GHMW
    Muller, MJ
    vanderSchot, ACM
    vanDam, FSAM
    Keus, RB
    Koning, CCE
    Huinink, WWT
    vanDongen, JA
    Dubbelman, R
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1996, 14 (03) : 984 - 996
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1996, FIN REP
  • [3] FALSE HOPES AND BEST DATA - CONSENT TO RESEARCH AND THE THERAPEUTIC MISCONCEPTION
    APPELBAUM, PS
    ROTH, LH
    LIDZ, CW
    BENSON, P
    WINSLADE, W
    [J]. HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 1987, 17 (02) : 20 - 24
  • [4] Beauchamp TL, 1994, Principles of biomedical ethics
  • [5] Can the written information to research subjects be improved? - an empirical study
    Bjorn, E
    Rossel, P
    Holm, S
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 1999, 25 (03) : 263 - 267
  • [6] *COMPR WORK GROUP, 2001, REC DEV INF CONS DOC
  • [7] PERCEPTIONS OF CANCER-PATIENTS AND THEIR PHYSICIANS INVOLVED IN PHASE-I TRIALS
    DAUGHERTY, C
    RATAIN, MJ
    GROCHOWSKI, E
    STOCKING, C
    KODISH, E
    MICK, R
    SIEGLER, M
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 1995, 13 (05) : 1062 - 1072
  • [8] What makes clinical research ethical?
    Emanuel, EJ
    Wendler, D
    Grady, C
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 283 (20): : 2701 - 2711
  • [9] MEASURING PATIENTS DESIRE FOR AUTONOMY - DECISION-MAKING AND INFORMATION-SEEKING PREFERENCES AMONG MEDICAL PATIENTS
    ENDE, J
    KAZIS, L
    ASH, A
    MOSKOWITZ, MA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1989, 4 (01) : 23 - 30
  • [10] A New Readability Yardstick
    Flesch, Rudolf
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, 1948, 32 (03) : 221 - 233