Readability of informed consent documents and its impact on consent refusal rate.

Q2 Medicine Perspectives in Clinical Research Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-30 DOI:10.4103/picr.picr_322_23
Yash V Kamath, Yashashri C Shetty, Ishita C Lanjewar, Ankita Kulkarni
{"title":"Readability of informed consent documents and its impact on consent refusal rate.","authors":"Yash V Kamath, Yashashri C Shetty, Ishita C Lanjewar, Ankita Kulkarni","doi":"10.4103/picr.picr_322_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Informed consent documents (ICDs) are integral to a research project and must provide all required information to the participant. We undertook a 6-year retrospective cross-sectional analysis of ICDs to assess the same.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We accessed 300 ICDs from studies submitted to institutional ethics committee. Studies were selected using random proportional-to-size sampling across years and study types (thesis, pharma, government, investigator initiated [OA] studies). We used the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score (FRES), estimated reading time (ERT) and scored ICDs out of 13 points on the basis of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)-mandated headings (ICD Quality Score [IQS]). Information pertaining to the consent refusal rate (CRR) of each study was correlated with FRES, ERT, and other parameters. <i>P</i> <0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Two hundred and ninety-three ICDs had complete information. Median FRES was 48.3 (interquartile range [IQR] = 7), median ERT was 4.5 min (IQR = 1.3), the median expected duration of participation was 35 min (IQR = 40); compensation was provided by 23 projects and median compensation was Rs. 2500 (IQR = Rs. 4750). Mean IQS improved from 11.95 to 12.60 in 6 years (Kruskal-Wallis test, <i>P</i> < 0.001). FRES was weakly negatively correlated to the CRR (<i>r</i> = -0.120, <i>P</i> = 0.039), while the expected duration of participation was weakly positively correlated (<i>r</i> = 0.144, <i>P</i> = 0.014).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pharma studies performed better and ICDs have improved in their readability and ICMR guidelines compliance.</p>","PeriodicalId":20015,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives in Clinical Research","volume":"16 1","pages":"38-43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11759238/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives in Clinical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/picr.picr_322_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Informed consent documents (ICDs) are integral to a research project and must provide all required information to the participant. We undertook a 6-year retrospective cross-sectional analysis of ICDs to assess the same.

Methods: We accessed 300 ICDs from studies submitted to institutional ethics committee. Studies were selected using random proportional-to-size sampling across years and study types (thesis, pharma, government, investigator initiated [OA] studies). We used the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score (FRES), estimated reading time (ERT) and scored ICDs out of 13 points on the basis of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)-mandated headings (ICD Quality Score [IQS]). Information pertaining to the consent refusal rate (CRR) of each study was correlated with FRES, ERT, and other parameters. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: Two hundred and ninety-three ICDs had complete information. Median FRES was 48.3 (interquartile range [IQR] = 7), median ERT was 4.5 min (IQR = 1.3), the median expected duration of participation was 35 min (IQR = 40); compensation was provided by 23 projects and median compensation was Rs. 2500 (IQR = Rs. 4750). Mean IQS improved from 11.95 to 12.60 in 6 years (Kruskal-Wallis test, P < 0.001). FRES was weakly negatively correlated to the CRR (r = -0.120, P = 0.039), while the expected duration of participation was weakly positively correlated (r = 0.144, P = 0.014).

Conclusion: Pharma studies performed better and ICDs have improved in their readability and ICMR guidelines compliance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Perspectives in Clinical Research
Perspectives in Clinical Research Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: This peer review quarterly journal is positioned to build a learning clinical research community in India. This scientific journal will have a broad coverage of topics across clinical research disciplines including clinical research methodology, research ethics, clinical data management, training, data management, biostatistics, regulatory and will include original articles, reviews, news and views, perspectives, and other interesting sections. PICR will offer all clinical research stakeholders in India – academicians, ethics committees, regulators, and industry professionals -a forum for exchange of ideas, information and opinions.
期刊最新文献
Incidence of adverse drug reactions among tuberculosis patients initiated on daily drug regimen in a southern district of Karnataka. Novel trial designs: Master protocol trials. Readability of informed consent documents and its impact on consent refusal rate. A comprehensive review of challenges and opportunities for stem cell research in India. Antibiotics-induced pulmonary embolism: A disproportionality analysis in Food and Drug Administration database of Adverse Event Reporting System using data mining algorithms.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1