Suppr超能文献

通过摘要提高家长对研究的理解的许可形式:一项随机试验。

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

作者信息

D'Angio C T, Wang H, Hunn J E, Pryhuber G S, Chess P R, Lakshminrusimha S

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, University of Rochester Medical Center, Golisano Children's Hospital, Rochester, NY, USA.

Department of Biostatistics, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.

出版信息

J Perinatol. 2017 Jun;37(6):735-739. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.26. Epub 2017 Mar 30.

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.

摘要

目的

我们假设,在潜在新生儿研究对象的父母中,与标准表格(对照)相比,添加到许可表格中的附带封面页(干预措施)会增强对研究的理解。

研究设计

这项试点研究纳入了因两项索引研究之一而被接触的父母:一项随机试验和一项观察性研究。一页的封面页描述了关键的研究信息。家庭被1:1随机分配以接收或不接收封面页。测量了客观和主观理解及满意度。

结果

32名父母完成了所有测量(17名对照,15名干预)。对照组和干预组之间在理解分数(16.8±5.7对16.3±3.5)、主观理解(中位数6对6.5)或对同意的总体满意度(中位数7对6.5)方面没有差异(所有P>0.50)。

结论

简化的许可表格封面页对父母对其新生儿所参与研究的理解没有影响。

相似文献

1
Permission form synopses to improve parents' understanding of research: a randomized trial.
J Perinatol. 2017 Jun;37(6):735-739. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.26. Epub 2017 Mar 30.
2
The quality of parental consent for research with children: a prospective repeated measure self-report survey.
Int J Nurs Stud. 2007 May;44(4):525-33. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.03.014. Epub 2006 May 18.
3
Evaluation of the content and process of informed consent discussions for neonatal research.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Jul;7(3):78-83. doi: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.78.
4
Enhancing the "informed" in informed consent: a pilot test of a multimedia presentation.
Health Commun. 2010 Jun;25(4):365-74. doi: 10.1080/10410231003775198.
6
Assessment of parental decision-making in neonatal cardiac research: a pilot study.
J Med Ethics. 2010 Feb;36(2):106-10. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.030676.
7
A randomized study of a method for optimizing adolescent assent to biomedical research.
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017 Jul-Sep;8(3):189-197. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2016.1251507. Epub 2016 Oct 24.
9
Maternal knowledge and attitudes to universal newborn hearing screening: Reviewing an established program.
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2018 Feb;105:146-153. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2017.12.021. Epub 2017 Dec 23.
10
Parental perspectives on consent for participation in large-scale, non-biological data repositories.
Life Sci Soc Policy. 2016;12:1. doi: 10.1186/s40504-016-0034-6. Epub 2016 Jan 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Can we make informed consent forms more informative?
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2018 Sep;103(5):F398-F399. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2017-314126. Epub 2017 Dec 8.

本文引用的文献

3
Reading Level and Length of Written Research Consent Forms.
Clin Transl Sci. 2015 Aug;8(4):355-6. doi: 10.1111/cts.12253. Epub 2015 Jan 8.
4
How well informed is the informed consent for cancer clinical trials?
Clin Trials. 2014 Dec;11(6):686-8. doi: 10.1177/1740774514548734. Epub 2014 Aug 18.
5
Participant comprehension of research for which they volunteer: a systematic review.
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2014 Nov;46(6):423-31. doi: 10.1111/jnu.12097. Epub 2014 Aug 15.
9
Informing the uninformed: optimizing the consent message using a fractional factorial design.
JAMA Pediatr. 2013 Jul;167(7):640-6. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.1385.
10
A booklet on participants' rights to improve consent for clinical research: a randomized trial.
PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e47023. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047023. Epub 2012 Oct 19.

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