Supplementing Consent for a Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study of Infants With Antenatal Opioid Exposure: Development and Assessment of a Digital Tool.

IF 2 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR Formative Research Pub Date : 2025-03-04 DOI:10.2196/59954
Jamie E Newman, Leslie Clarke, Pranav Athimuthu, Megan Dhawan, Sharon Owen, Traci Beiersdorfer, Lindsay M Parlberg, Ananta Bangdiwala, Taya McMillan, Sara B DeMauro, Scott Lorch, Myriam Peralta-Carcelen, Deanne Wilson-Costello, Namasivayam Ambalavanan, Stephanie L Merhar, Brenda Poindexter, Catherine Limperopoulos, Jonathan M Davis, Michele Walsh, Carla M Bann
{"title":"Supplementing Consent for a Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study of Infants With Antenatal Opioid Exposure: Development and Assessment of a Digital Tool.","authors":"Jamie E Newman, Leslie Clarke, Pranav Athimuthu, Megan Dhawan, Sharon Owen, Traci Beiersdorfer, Lindsay M Parlberg, Ananta Bangdiwala, Taya McMillan, Sara B DeMauro, Scott Lorch, Myriam Peralta-Carcelen, Deanne Wilson-Costello, Namasivayam Ambalavanan, Stephanie L Merhar, Brenda Poindexter, Catherine Limperopoulos, Jonathan M Davis, Michele Walsh, Carla M Bann","doi":"10.2196/59954","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Outcomes of Babies With Opioid Exposure (OBOE) study is an observational cohort study examining the impact of antenatal opioid exposure on outcomes from birth to 2 years of age. COVID-19 social distancing measures presented challenges to research coordinators discussing the study at length with potential participants during the birth hospitalization, which impacted recruitment, particularly among caregivers of unexposed (control) infants. In response, the OBOE study developed a digital tool (consenter video) to supplement the informed consent process, make it more engaging, and foster greater identification with the research procedures among potential participants.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aim to examine knowledge of the study, experiences with the consent process, and perceptions of the consenter video among potential participants of the OBOE study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Analyses included 129 caregivers who were given the option to view the consenter video as a supplement to the consent process. Participants selected from 3 racially and ethnically diverse avatars to guide them through the 11-minute video with recorded voice-overs. After viewing the consenter video, participants completed a short survey to assess their knowledge of the study, experiences with the consent process, and perceptions of the tool, regardless of their decision to enroll in the main study. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences between caregivers of opioid-exposed and unexposed infants in survey responses and whether caregivers who selected avatars consistent with their racial or ethnic background were more likely to enroll in the study than those who selected avatars that were not consistent with their background.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants demonstrated good understanding of the information presented, with 95% (n=123) correctly identifying the study purpose and 88% (n=112) correctly indicating that their infant would not be exposed to radiation during the magnetic resonance imaging. Nearly all indicated they were provided \"just the right amount of information\" (n=123, 98%) and that they understood the consent information well enough to decide whether to enroll (n=125, 97%). Survey responses were similar between caregivers of opioid-exposed infants and unexposed infants on all items except the decision to enroll. Those in the opioid-exposed group were more likely to enroll in the main study compared to the unexposed group (n=49, 89% vs n=38, 51%; P<.001). Of 81 caregivers with known race or ethnicity, 35 (43%) chose avatars to guide them through the video that matched their background. Caregivers selecting avatars consistent with their racial or ethnic background were more likely to enroll in the main study (n=29, 83% vs n=43, 57%; P=.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This interactive digital tool was helpful in informing prospective participants about the study. The consenter tool enhanced the informed consent process, reinforced why caregivers of unexposed infants were being approached, and was particularly helpful as a resource for families to understand magnetic resonance imaging procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":14841,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Formative Research","volume":"9 ","pages":"e59954"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896084/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Formative Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/59954","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Outcomes of Babies With Opioid Exposure (OBOE) study is an observational cohort study examining the impact of antenatal opioid exposure on outcomes from birth to 2 years of age. COVID-19 social distancing measures presented challenges to research coordinators discussing the study at length with potential participants during the birth hospitalization, which impacted recruitment, particularly among caregivers of unexposed (control) infants. In response, the OBOE study developed a digital tool (consenter video) to supplement the informed consent process, make it more engaging, and foster greater identification with the research procedures among potential participants.

Objective: We aim to examine knowledge of the study, experiences with the consent process, and perceptions of the consenter video among potential participants of the OBOE study.

Methods: Analyses included 129 caregivers who were given the option to view the consenter video as a supplement to the consent process. Participants selected from 3 racially and ethnically diverse avatars to guide them through the 11-minute video with recorded voice-overs. After viewing the consenter video, participants completed a short survey to assess their knowledge of the study, experiences with the consent process, and perceptions of the tool, regardless of their decision to enroll in the main study. Chi-square tests were used to assess differences between caregivers of opioid-exposed and unexposed infants in survey responses and whether caregivers who selected avatars consistent with their racial or ethnic background were more likely to enroll in the study than those who selected avatars that were not consistent with their background.

Results: Participants demonstrated good understanding of the information presented, with 95% (n=123) correctly identifying the study purpose and 88% (n=112) correctly indicating that their infant would not be exposed to radiation during the magnetic resonance imaging. Nearly all indicated they were provided "just the right amount of information" (n=123, 98%) and that they understood the consent information well enough to decide whether to enroll (n=125, 97%). Survey responses were similar between caregivers of opioid-exposed infants and unexposed infants on all items except the decision to enroll. Those in the opioid-exposed group were more likely to enroll in the main study compared to the unexposed group (n=49, 89% vs n=38, 51%; P<.001). Of 81 caregivers with known race or ethnicity, 35 (43%) chose avatars to guide them through the video that matched their background. Caregivers selecting avatars consistent with their racial or ethnic background were more likely to enroll in the main study (n=29, 83% vs n=43, 57%; P=.01).

Conclusions: This interactive digital tool was helpful in informing prospective participants about the study. The consenter tool enhanced the informed consent process, reinforced why caregivers of unexposed infants were being approached, and was particularly helpful as a resource for families to understand magnetic resonance imaging procedures.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
对产前阿片类药物暴露婴儿的前瞻性纵向队列研究补充同意:数字工具的开发和评估。
背景:阿片类药物暴露婴儿的结局(OBOE)研究是一项观察性队列研究,旨在研究产前阿片类药物暴露对出生至2岁结局的影响。COVID-19社会距离措施给研究协调员带来了挑战,他们在出生住院期间与潜在参与者详细讨论了这项研究,这影响了招募,特别是在未接触(对照)婴儿的护理人员中。作为回应,OBOE研究开发了一种数字工具(同意视频)来补充知情同意过程,使其更具吸引力,并在潜在参与者中培养对研究程序的更大认同感。目的:我们的目的是检查研究的知识,同意过程的经验,以及OBOE研究的潜在参与者对同意视频的看法。方法:分析包括129名护理人员,他们可以选择观看同意视频,作为同意过程的补充。参与者从3个不同种族和民族的化身中选择,指导他们完成11分钟的视频,并录制画外音。在观看了同意视频后,参与者完成了一个简短的调查,以评估他们对研究的了解、同意过程的经历和对工具的看法,无论他们是否决定参加主要研究。卡方检验用于评估阿片类药物暴露婴儿和未暴露婴儿的护理人员在调查反应中的差异,以及选择与他们的种族或民族背景一致的化身的护理人员是否比选择与他们的背景不一致的化身的护理人员更有可能参加研究。结果:参与者表现出对所提供信息的良好理解,95% (n=123)正确识别研究目的,88% (n=112)正确表明他们的婴儿在磁共振成像期间不会暴露在辐射中。几乎所有人都表示他们被提供了“恰到好处的信息量”(n= 123,98%),并且他们对同意信息的理解足以决定是否注册(n= 125,97%)。除了决定入组外,阿片类药物暴露婴儿和未暴露婴儿的护理人员在所有项目上的调查回答都相似。与未暴露组相比,阿片类药物暴露组更有可能参加主要研究(n= 49.89% vs n= 38.51%;结论:这种交互式数字工具有助于告知潜在参与者有关研究的信息。同意工具加强了知情同意过程,强化了为什么要联系未暴露婴儿的照顾者,并且作为家庭了解磁共振成像程序的资源特别有帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR Formative Research
JMIR Formative Research Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
579
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Designing an Indicator‑Driven, Value‑Based Architecture for Pneumonia Prevention in Japan: A Formative Policy Viewpoint on Adult Vaccination and Oral Care. Feasibility and Acceptability of Just Breathe, A Novel Handheld Mindful Breathing Device, for Postpartum Stress: Pilot, Single-Arm Pre-Post Study. Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Medical Question Answering on a Heart Failure Dataset: Performance Analysis. Exploring Use of Digital Health Technologies, Digital Health Care Literacy, and Attitudes Toward Digital Health Among Norwegian Health Care Personnel Involved in Home-Based Pediatric Palliative Care: Cross-Sectional Study. Correction: Comparing ChatGPT and DeepSeek for Assessment of Multiple-Choice Questions in Orthopedic Medical Education: Cross-Sectional Study.
×
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:604180095
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