Suppr超能文献

脊椎按摩疗法临床研究的知情同意文件是否符合可读性水平建议并包含所需要素:一项描述性研究。

Do informed consent documents for chiropractic clinical research studies meet readability level recommendations and contain required elements: a descriptive study.

作者信息

Twist Elissa, Lawrence Dana J, Salsbury Stacie A, Hawk Cheryl

机构信息

Palmer Center for Chiropractic Research, 741 Brady Street, Davenport, IA 52803 USA.

Palmer College of Chiropractic, 1000 Brady St., Davenport, IA 52803 USA.

出版信息

Chiropr Man Therap. 2014 Dec 10;22(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12998-014-0040-9. eCollection 2014.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Informed consent documents (ICD) in research are designed to educate research participants about the nature of the research project in which he or she may participate. United States (US) law requires the documents to contain specific elements present and be written in a way that is understandable to research participants. The purpose of this research is to determine if ICDs from randomized controlled trials conducted at chiropractic colleges meet recommended readability standards and contain the 13 content items required by US law.

METHODS

This study was approved by Palmer College of Chiropractic's IRB #2012-12-3-T and was conducted between December 3, 2012 and February 14, 2013. We contacted the research directors of five chiropractic colleges that have received federal funding supporting their clinical research. A total of 13 informed consent documents from four chiropractic colleges were analyzed using the Flesch-Kincaid measurement. We assigned a grade-level readability score to the document based on the average of three separate grade level scores conducted on the three largest uninterrupted blocks of text. Content of the 13 ICDs was assessed using a 13-element checklist. A point was given for every element present in the document, giving a score range of "0, no elements are present", to "13, all elements are present."

RESULTS

The mean Flesch-Kincaid grade level readability was 10.8 (range 7.2 -14.0). Our sample had a mean readability score 2.8 grade levels above the generally-accepted US average reading level. Content varied among the 13 informed consent forms, ranging from only nine elements present in one document to all 13 required in five documents. Additionally, we collated the risks presented in each document.

CONCLUSION

These results strongly suggest that chiropractic clinical researchers are not developing ICDs at a readability level congruent with the national average acceptable level. The low number of elements in some of the informed consent documents raises concern that not all research participants were fully informed when given the informed consent, and it may suggest that some documents may not be in compliance with federal requirements. Risk varies among institutions and even within institutions for the same intervention.

摘要

背景

研究中的知情同意文件(ICD)旨在向研究参与者介绍其可能参与的研究项目的性质。美国法律要求这些文件包含特定要素,并以研究参与者能够理解的方式撰写。本研究的目的是确定脊椎按摩疗法学院进行的随机对照试验中的知情同意文件是否符合推荐的可读性标准,并包含美国法律要求的13项内容。

方法

本研究经帕默脊椎按摩疗法学院的IRB #2012 - 12 - 3 - T批准,于2012年12月3日至2013年2月14日进行。我们联系了五所获得联邦资金支持其临床研究的脊椎按摩疗法学院的研究主任。使用弗莱什 - 金凯德测量法对四所脊椎按摩疗法学院的总共13份知情同意文件进行了分析。我们根据对三个最大的不间断文本块进行的三个单独年级水平分数的平均值为文件分配一个年级水平可读性分数。使用13要素清单评估13份知情同意文件的内容。文件中每出现一个要素得一分,得分范围从“0,无要素”到“13,所有要素”。

结果

弗莱什 - 金凯德年级水平可读性平均为10.8(范围7.2 - 14.0)。我们的样本的平均可读性分数比美国普遍接受的平均阅读水平高2.8个年级。13份知情同意书的内容各不相同,从一份文件中仅出现9个要素到五份文件中出现所有13个要求的要素。此外,我们整理了每份文件中呈现的风险。

结论

这些结果强烈表明,脊椎按摩疗法临床研究人员所制定的知情同意文件的可读性水平与全国平均可接受水平不一致。一些知情同意文件中的要素数量较少,这引发了人们对并非所有研究参与者在签署知情同意书时都得到充分告知的担忧,并且可能表明一些文件可能不符合联邦要求。不同机构之间甚至同一机构内针对相同干预措施的风险也有所不同。

相似文献

2
Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability.
N Engl J Med. 2003 Feb 20;348(8):721-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa021212.
3
Assessment of Length and Readability of Informed Consent Documents for COVID-19 Vaccine Trials.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Apr 1;4(4):e2110843. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.10843.
4
The readability of informed consent forms for research studies conducted in South Africa.
S Afr Med J. 2021 Feb 1;111(2):180-183. doi: 10.7196/SAMJ.2021.v111i2.14752.
5
Readability of Invasive Procedure Consent Forms.
Clin Transl Sci. 2015 Dec;8(6):830-3. doi: 10.1111/cts.12364. Epub 2015 Dec 17.
7
Informed consent conversations and documents: A quantitative comparison.
Cancer. 2016 Feb 1;122(3):464-9. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29759. Epub 2015 Oct 27.
8
Comprehensibility of translated informed consent documents used in clinical research in psychiatry.
Indian J Psychol Med. 2010 Jan;32(1):7-12. doi: 10.4103/0253-7176.70517.
10
Applying a Digital Health Checklist and Readability Tools to Improve Informed Consent for Digital Health Research.
Front Digit Health. 2021 Jul 15;3:690901. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2021.690901. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

2
Shared decision making through informed consent in chiropractic management of low back pain.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2012 Mar-Apr;35(3):216-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2012.01.004. Epub 2012 Mar 8.
3
Human subject research: reporting ethics approval and informed consent in 3 chiropractic journals.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2011 Nov;34(9):627-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2011.02.008.
4
Adverse events and manual therapy: a systematic review.
Man Ther. 2010 Aug;15(4):355-63. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2009.12.006. Epub 2010 Jan 22.
5
Should the chiropractic profession embrace the doctrine of informed consent?
J Chiropr Med. 2008 Sep;7(3):107-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2008.04.002.
6
Adverse events following chiropractic care for subjects with neck or low-back pain: do the benefits outweigh the risks?
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2008 Jul-Aug;31(6):461-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.06.001.
7
Do chiropractic college faculty understand informed consent: a pilot study.
Chiropr Osteopat. 2006 Dec 21;14:27. doi: 10.1186/1746-1340-14-27.
8
Research assistants' perspective of clinical trials: results of a focus group.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2003 Jun;26(5):287-92. doi: 10.1016/S0161-4754(03)00044-7.
9
Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability.
N Engl J Med. 2003 Feb 20;348(8):721-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa021212.
10
Can the written information to research subjects be improved?--an empirical study.
J Med Ethics. 1999 Jun;25(3):263-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.25.3.263.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验