Dataset Information

Permission form synopses to improve parents' understanding of research: a randomized trial.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:We hypothesized that, among parents of potential neonatal research subjects, an accompanying cover sheet added to the permission form (intervention) would increase understanding of the research, when compared to a standard form (control). STUDY DESIGN:This pilot study enrolled parents approached for one of two index studies: one randomized trial and one observational study. A one-page cover sheet described critical study information. Families were randomized 1:1 to receive the cover sheet or not. Objective and subjective understanding and satisfaction were measured. RESULTS:Thirty-two parents completed all measures (17 control, 15 intervention). There were no differences in comprehension score (16.8±5.7 vs 16.3±3.5), subjective understanding (median 6 vs 6.5), or overall satisfaction with consent (median 7 vs 6.5) between control and intervention groups (all P>0.50). CONCLUSION:A simplified permission form cover sheet had no effect on parents' understanding of studies for which their newborns were being recruited.

SUBMITTER: D'Angio CT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5446277 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Permission form synopses to improve parents' understanding of research: a randomized trial.

D'Angio C T CT Wang H H Hunn J E JE Pryhuber G S GS Chess P R PR Lakshminrusimha S S

Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association 20170330 6

<h4>Objective</h4>We hypothesized that, among parents of potential neonatal research subjects, an accompanying cover sheet added to the permission form (intervention) would increase understanding of the research, when compared to a standard form (control).<h4>Study design</h4>This pilot study enrolled parents approached for one of two index studies: one randomized trial and one observational study. A one-page cover sheet described critical study information. Families were randomized 1:1 to recei ...[more]

PMID: 28358380

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveInformation on the rights of subjects in clinical trials has become increasingly complex and difficult to understand. This study evaluates whether a simple booklet which is relevant to all research studies improves the understanding of rights needed for subjects to provide informed consent.Methods21 currently used informed consent forms (ICF) from international clinical trials were separated into information related to the specific research study, and general information on participants' rights. A booklet designed to provide information on participants' rights which used simple language was developed to replace this information in current ICF's Readability of each component of ICF's and the booklet was then assessed using the Flesch-Kincaid Reading ease score (FK). To further evaluate the booklet 282 hospital inpatients were randomised to one of three ways to present research information; a standard ICF, the booklet combined with a short ICF, or the booklet combined with a simplified ICF. Comprehension of information related to the research proposal and to participant's rights was assessed by questionnaire.ResultsInformation related to participants' rights contributed an average of 44% of the words in standard ICFs, and was harder to read than information describing the clinical trial (FK 25 versus (vs.) 41 respectively, p?=?0.0003). The booklet reduced the number of words and improved FK from 25 to 42. The simplified ICF had a slightly higher FK score than the standard ICF (50 vs. 42). Comprehension assessed in inpatients was better for the booklet and short ICF 62%, (95% confidence interval (CI) 56 to 67) correct, or simplified ICF 62% (CI 58 to 68) correct compared to 52%, (CI 47 to 57) correct for the standard ICF, p?=?0.009. This was due to better understanding of questions on rights (62% vs. 49% correct, p?=?0.0008). Comprehension of study related information was similar for the simplified and standard ICF (60% vs. 64% correct, p?=?0.68).ConclusionsA booklet provides a simple consistent approach to providing information on participant rights which is relevant to all research studies, and improves comprehension of patients who typically participate in clinical trials.

Project description:Few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) report interventions targeting improvement of frailty status as an outcome.This RCT enrolled 117 older adults (65-79?years of age) in Toufen, Taiwan who scored 3-6 on The Chinese Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale Telephone Version and then score ?1 on the Cardiovascular Health Study Phenotypic Classification of Frailty (CHS_PCF). With a two by two factorial design, subjects were randomly assigned to interventions (Exercise and nutrition, EN, n?=?55 or problem solving therapy, PST, n?=?57) or controls (non-EN, n?=?62 or non-PST, n?=?60). Educational booklets were provided to all. EN group subjects received nutrition consultation and a thrice-weekly exercise-training program while PST group subjects received 6 sessions in 3?month. Subjects were followed at 3, 6, and 12?months. Primary outcome was improvement of the CHS_PCF by at least one category (from pre-frail to robust, or from frail to pre-frail or robust) from baseline assessments. One hundred and one completed final assessments. Intention-to-treat analysis with the generalized estimating equation model was applied with adjustment for time and treatment-by-time interactions.Mean age was 71.4?±?3.7?years, with 59% females. Baseline characteristic were generally comparable between groups. EN group subjects had a higher improvement rate on the primary outcome than non-EN group subjects (45% vs 27%, adjusted p?=?0.008) at 3?months, but not 6 or 12?months. They also had more increase of serum 25(OH) vitamin D level (4.9?±?7.7 vs 1.2?±?5.4, p?=?0.006) and lower percentage of osteopenia (74% vs 89% p?=?0.042) at 12?months. PST group subjects had better improvement (2.7?±?6.1 vs 0.2?±?6.7, p?=?0.035, 6-month) and less deterioration (-3.5?±?9.7 vs -7.1?±?8.7, p?=?0.036, 12-month) of dominant leg extension power than non-PST subjects. Some secondary outcomes were also improved in control groups (non-EN or non-PST). No adverse effects were reported.The three-month EN intervention resulted in short-term (3-month) frailty status improvement and long-term effect on bone mineral density and serum vitamin D (12-month) among Taiwanese community-dwelling elders. The effect of PST was less pronounced.ClinicalTrials.gov: EC0970301

Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about why parents agree to take part in randomized controlled trials for adolescent mental health. This study aimed to investigate parents' perspectives on participating in a trial for psychological treatment of depression. The study explored parents' motivations, understanding of the trial and perspectives on the acceptability of the trial.MethodsSixty-five parents took part in this qualitative study. Their adolescent children had been randomly allocated to one of three active psychological treatments for depression as part of the IMPACT trial and were interviewed about their experiences of participating in the study. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using framework analysis.ResultsFor seven of the sixty-five parents, their experience of taking part in the trial was not covered in their interview so they were excluded from the analysis. The analysis was therefore based on the data from the parents of 58 adolescents taking part in the trial. The most commonly cited motivation for taking part in the study reported by parents was a desire to help others going through similar difficulties. Parents generally reported finding trial participation acceptable, although there were aspects that some reported finding less acceptable, including randomization and the burden of research assessments. Others spoke positively about the experience of trial participation and found it enjoyable or even therapeutic. Importantly, some did not appear to have a good understanding of the trial design, including randomization and treatment allocation.ConclusionsThis study indicates that trial participation can be a positive experience for parents, yet it raises concerns about how trialists can ensure that consent is fully informed, given that some parents appeared to have a poor understanding of the trial. Future studies should seek to explore how communication with trial participants can be improved, to ensure that trial participation is fully informed. Patient and public involvement will be crucial in ensuring this communication is accessible to stakeholders.Trial registrationISRCTN registry ISRCTN83033550 . Registered on 15 October 2009.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 outbreak has now become a pandemic and has had a serious adverse impact on global public health. The effect of COVID-19 on the lungs can be determined through 2D computed tomography (CT) imaging, which requires a high level of spatial imagination on the part of the medical provider.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to determine whether viewing a 3D hologram with mixed reality techniques can improve medical professionals' understanding of the pulmonary lesions caused by COVID-19.MethodsThe study involved 60 participants, including 20 radiologists, 20 surgeons, and 20 medical students. Each of the three groups was randomly divided into two groups, either the 2D CT group (n=30; mean age 29 years [range 19-38 years]; males=20) or the 3D holographic group (n=30; mean age 30 years [range 20=38 years]; males=20). The two groups completed the same task, which involved identifying lung lesions caused by COVID-19 for 6 cases using a 2D CT or 3D hologram. Finally, an independent radiology professor rated the participants' performance (out of 100). All participants in two groups completed a Likert scale questionnaire regarding the educational utility and efficiency of 3D holograms. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) was completed by all participants.ResultsThe mean task score of the 3D hologram group (mean 91.98, SD 2.45) was significantly higher than that of the 2D CT group (mean 74.09, SD 7.59; P<.001). With the help of 3D holograms, surgeons and medical students achieved the same score as radiologists and made obvious progress in identifying pulmonary lesions caused by COVID-19. The Likert scale questionnaire results showed that the 3D hologram group had superior results compared to the 2D CT group (teaching: 2D CT group median 2, IQR 1-2 versus 3D group median 5, IQR 5-5; P<.001; understanding and communicating: 2D CT group median 1, IQR 1-1 versus 3D group median 5, IQR 5-5; P<.001; increasing interest: 2D CT group median 2, IQR 2-2 versus 3D group median 5, IQR 5-5; P<.001; lowering the learning curve: 2D CT group median 2, IQR 1-2 versus 3D group median 4, IQR 4-5; P<.001; spatial awareness: 2D CT group median 2, IQR 1-2 versus 3D group median 5, IQR 5-5; P<.001; learning: 2D CT group median 3, IQR 2-3 versus 3D group median 5, IQR 5-5; P<.001). The 3D group scored significantly lower than the 2D CT group for the "mental," "temporal," "performance," and "frustration" subscales on the NASA-TLX.ConclusionsA 3D hologram with mixed reality techniques can be used to help medical professionals, especially medical students and newly hired doctors, better identify pulmonary lesions caused by COVID-19. It can be used in medical education to improve spatial awareness, increase interest, improve understandability, and lower the learning curve.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100045845; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=125761.

Dataset Information

Permission form synopses to improve parents' understanding of research: a randomized trial.

Publications

Permission form synopses to improve parents' understanding of research: a randomized trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets