Marshall Patricia A, Magtanong Ruth V, Leek Angela C, Hizlan Sabahat, Yamokoski Amy D, Kodish Eric D
Center for Genetic Research Ethics and Law, Department of Bioethics, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Apr;7(2):51-9. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.2.51.
During informed consent conferences (ICCs) for Phase I trials, oncologists must present complex information while addressing concerns. Research on communication that evolves during ICCs remains largely unexplored. We examined communication during ICCs for pediatric Phase I cancer trials using a stratified random sample from six pediatric cancer centers. A grounded theory approach identified key communication steps and factors influencing the negotiation of decisions for trial participation. Analysis suggests that during ICCs, families, patients, and clinicians exercise choice and control by negotiating micro-decisions in two broad domains: drug logic and logistics, and administration/scheduling. Micro-decisions unfold in a four-step communication process: (1) introduction of an issue; (2) response; (3) negotiation of the issue; and (4) resolution and decision. Negotiation over smaller micro-decisions is prominent in ICCs and merits further study.
在针对I期试验的知情同意会议(ICC)期间,肿瘤学家在解决相关问题时必须提供复杂的信息。对于ICC期间不断演变的沟通情况的研究在很大程度上仍未得到探索。我们使用来自六个儿科癌症中心的分层随机样本,研究了儿科I期癌症试验ICC期间的沟通情况。一种扎根理论方法确定了关键的沟通步骤以及影响试验参与决策协商的因素。分析表明,在ICC期间,家庭、患者和临床医生通过在两个广泛领域协商微观决策来行使选择权和控制权:药物逻辑与后勤,以及给药/日程安排。微观决策在一个四步沟通流程中展开:(1)问题引入;(2)回应;(3)问题协商;以及(4)解决与决策。在ICC中,就较小微观决策进行的协商很突出,值得进一步研究。