• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

全外显子组和全基因组测序知情同意书的可读性。

Readability of informed consent forms for whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing.

作者信息

Niemiec Emilia, Vears Danya F, Borry Pascal, Howard Heidi Carmen

机构信息

Erasmus Mundus Joint International Doctoral (Ph.D.) Degree Programme in Law, Science and Technology, University of Bologna, Via Galliera 3, 40121, Bologna, Italy.

Department of Law, University of Turin, Lungo Dora Siena 100 A, 10153, Turin, Italy.

出版信息

J Community Genet. 2018 Apr;9(2):143-151. doi: 10.1007/s12687-017-0324-6. Epub 2017 Aug 31.

DOI:10.1007/s12687-017-0324-6
PMID:28856579
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5849699/
Abstract

Whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing (WES, WGS) can generate an unprecedented amount of complex information, making the informed consent (IC) process challenging. The aim of our study was to assess the readability of English IC forms for clinical whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing using the SMOG and Flesch-Kincaid formulas. We analysed 36 forms, most of which were from US providers. The median readability grade levels were 14.75 (the SMOG formula) and 12.2 (the Flesch-Kincaid formula); these values indicate the years of education after which a person would be able to understand a text studied. All forms studied seem to fail to meet the average recommended readability grade level of 8 (e.g. by Institutional Review Boards of US medical schools) for IC forms, indicating that the content of the forms may not be comprehensible to many patients. The sections aimed at health care professionals (HCPs) in the forms indicate that HCPs should be responsible for explaining IC information to the patients. However, WES and WGS may be increasingly offered by primary care professionals who may not (yet) have sufficient training to be able to communicate effectively with patients about genomics. Therefore, to secure an adequate, truly informed consent process, the task of developing good, legible examples of IC forms along with educating HCPs in genomics should be taken seriously, and adequate resources should be allocated to enable these tasks.

摘要

全外显子组测序和全基因组测序(WES,WGS)能够生成数量空前的复杂信息,这使得知情同意(IC)过程颇具挑战性。我们研究的目的是使用烟雾(SMOG)公式和弗莱什-金凯德(Flesch-Kincaid)公式评估临床全外显子组测序和全基因组测序英文IC表格的可读性。我们分析了36份表格,其中大部分来自美国的医疗机构。可读性年级中位数水平分别为14.75(烟雾公式)和12.2(弗莱什-金凯德公式);这些数值表明一个人在接受多少年教育后能够理解所研究的文本。所有研究的表格似乎都未达到IC表格平均推荐的8年级可读性水平(例如美国医学院校机构审查委员会所推荐的),这表明表格内容可能许多患者都难以理解。表格中针对医疗保健专业人员(HCPs)的部分表明,HCPs应负责向患者解释IC信息。然而,初级保健专业人员可能会越来越多地提供WES和WGS服务,而他们可能(目前)尚未接受足够的培训,无法就基因组学与患者进行有效沟通。因此,为确保有一个充分、真正的知情同意过程,应认真对待开发清晰易懂的IC表格示例以及对HCPs进行基因组学教育的任务,并应分配足够的资源来完成这些任务。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8f71/5849699/e39295fc41da/12687_2017_324_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8f71/5849699/b59dfac6f382/12687_2017_324_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8f71/5849699/dfb82e4b0018/12687_2017_324_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8f71/5849699/e39295fc41da/12687_2017_324_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8f71/5849699/b59dfac6f382/12687_2017_324_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8f71/5849699/dfb82e4b0018/12687_2017_324_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8f71/5849699/e39295fc41da/12687_2017_324_Fig3_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Readability of informed consent forms for whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing.全外显子组和全基因组测序知情同意书的可读性。
J Community Genet. 2018 Apr;9(2):143-151. doi: 10.1007/s12687-017-0324-6. Epub 2017 Aug 31.
2
The readability of informed consent forms for research studies conducted in South Africa.南非开展的研究性医学临床试验知情同意书的可读性。
S Afr Med J. 2021 Feb 1;111(2):180-183. doi: 10.7196/SAMJ.2021.v111i2.14752.
3
Assessing readability and comprehension of informed consent materials for medical device research: A survey of informed consents from FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health.评估医疗器械研究知情同意书的可读性和理解度:对 FDA 设备和放射健康中心知情同意书的调查。
Contemp Clin Trials. 2019 Oct;85:105831. doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2019.105831. Epub 2019 Aug 21.
4
Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability.知情同意书的可读性标准与实际可读性对比
N Engl J Med. 2003 Feb 20;348(8):721-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa021212.
5
Variation among Consent Forms for Clinical Whole Exome Sequencing.临床全外显子组测序知情同意书之间的差异。
J Genet Couns. 2018 Feb;27(1):104-114. doi: 10.1007/s10897-017-0127-2. Epub 2017 Jul 8.
6
Readability of Invasive Procedure Consent Forms.侵入性操作同意书的可读性。
Clin Transl Sci. 2015 Dec;8(6):830-3. doi: 10.1111/cts.12364. Epub 2015 Dec 17.
7
Content Analysis of Informed Consent for Whole Genome Sequencing Offered by Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Companies.直接面向消费者的基因检测公司提供的全基因组测序知情同意书的内容分析
Hum Mutat. 2016 Dec;37(12):1248-1256. doi: 10.1002/humu.23122. Epub 2016 Oct 5.
8
Is There a Difference Between the Readabilities of Informed Consent Forms Used for Elective and Emergency Procedures in Turkey?土耳其用于选择性和急诊手术的知情同意书的可读性是否存在差异?
Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2020 May;54(3):626-630. doi: 10.1007/s43441-019-00096-0. Epub 2020 Jan 6.
9
Evaluation of the readability of informed consent forms used in urology: Is there a difference between open, endoscopic, and laparoscopic surgery?泌尿外科知情同意书可读性评估:开放手术、内镜手术和腹腔镜手术的知情同意书是否存在差异?
Turk J Surg. 2018 Aug 28;34(4):295-299. doi: 10.5152/turkjsurg.2017.3973.
10
Evaluating the Readibility of Informed Consent Forms Available Before Anaesthesia: A Comparative Study.评估麻醉前可用的知情同意书的可读性:一项比较研究。
Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2014 Jun;42(3):140-4. doi: 10.5152/TJAR.2014.94547. Epub 2014 Mar 11.

引用本文的文献

1
Readability of health research informed consent forms: case of the National Health Research Ethics Committee in Tanzania.健康研究知情同意书的可读性:以坦桑尼亚国家卫生研究伦理委员会为例。
BMC Med Ethics. 2025 Apr 22;26(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s12910-025-01200-w.
2
The Genetic Basis of Non-Contact Soft Tissue Injuries-Are There Practical Applications of Genetic Knowledge?非接触性软组织损伤的遗传学基础——遗传学知识有实际应用吗?
Cells. 2024 Nov 5;13(22):1828. doi: 10.3390/cells13221828.
3
Comparing Attitudes Toward Different Consent Mediums: Semistructured Qualitative Study.

本文引用的文献

1
Socialising the genome.使基因组社会化。
Lancet. 2017 Apr 22;389(10079):1603-1604. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31011-5.
2
Evolving health care through personal genomics.通过个人基因组学推动医疗保健发展。
Nat Rev Genet. 2017 Apr;18(4):259-267. doi: 10.1038/nrg.2016.162. Epub 2017 Jan 31.
3
Content Analysis of Informed Consent for Whole Genome Sequencing Offered by Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Companies.直接面向消费者的基因检测公司提供的全基因组测序知情同意书的内容分析
比较对不同同意媒介的态度:半结构化定性研究。
JMIR Hum Factors. 2024 Apr 30;11:e53113. doi: 10.2196/53113.
4
Evaluating visual imagery for participant understanding of research concepts in genomics research.评估视觉意象以促进参与者对基因组学研究中研究概念的理解。
J Community Genet. 2023 Feb;14(1):51-62. doi: 10.1007/s12687-022-00628-6. Epub 2022 Dec 19.
5
ORCA, a values-based decision aid for selecting additional findings from genomic sequencing in adults: Efficacy results from a randomized trial.ORCA,一种基于价值的决策辅助工具,用于选择成年人基因组测序中的附加发现:一项随机试验的疗效结果。
Genet Med. 2022 Aug;24(8):1664-1674. doi: 10.1016/j.gim.2022.04.008. Epub 2022 May 6.
6
Two Rare Variants in and Genes-Do They Contribute to Semantic Dementia Clinical Phenotype?和 基因中的两个罕见变异-它们是否导致语义性痴呆的临床表型?
Genes (Basel). 2021 Nov 17;12(11):1806. doi: 10.3390/genes12111806.
7
Clinical management, ethics and informed consent related to multi-gene panel-based high throughput sequencing testing for platelet disorders: Communication from the SSC of the ISTH.与基于多基因panel的血小板疾病高通量测序检测相关的临床管理、伦理及知情同意:国际血栓与止血学会科学标准化委员会的沟通文件
J Thromb Haemost. 2020 Oct;18(10):2751-2758. doi: 10.1111/jth.14993.
8
Shortened consent forms for genome-wide sequencing: Parent and provider perspectives.全基因组测序简短知情同意书:家长和提供者的观点。
Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2020 Jul;8(7):e1254. doi: 10.1002/mgg3.1254. Epub 2020 May 8.
9
Revised Common Rule Changes to the Consent Process and Consent Form.对同意程序和同意书的修订后的《通用规则》变更
Ochsner J. 2020 Spring;20(1):62-75. doi: 10.31486/toj.19.0055.
10
Germline Genome Editing Research: What Are Gamete Donors (Not) Informed About in Consent Forms?种系基因组编辑研究:知情同意书中对配子供体隐瞒了哪些信息?
CRISPR J. 2020 Feb;3(1):52-63. doi: 10.1089/crispr.2019.0043.
Hum Mutat. 2016 Dec;37(12):1248-1256. doi: 10.1002/humu.23122. Epub 2016 Oct 5.
4
The New Era of Informed Consent: Getting to a Reasonable-Patient Standard Through Shared Decision Making.知情同意的新时代:通过共同决策达到合理患者标准。
JAMA. 2016 May 17;315(19):2063-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.3070.
5
Further Defining the Role of the Laboratory Genetic Counselor.进一步明确实验室遗传咨询师的角色。
J Genet Couns. 2016 Aug;25(4):786-98. doi: 10.1007/s10897-015-9927-4. Epub 2016 Feb 20.
6
Experiences with obtaining informed consent for genomic sequencing.获取基因组测序知情同意书的经验。
Am J Med Genet A. 2015 Nov;167A(11):2635-46. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.37256. Epub 2015 Jul 21.
7
Are physicians prepared for whole genome sequencing? a qualitative analysis.医生们为全基因组测序做好准备了吗?一项定性分析。
Clin Genet. 2016 Feb;89(2):228-34. doi: 10.1111/cge.12626. Epub 2015 Jul 7.
8
The challenge of informed consent and return of results in translational genomics: empirical analysis and recommendations.转化基因组学中知情同意与结果反馈的挑战:实证分析与建议
J Law Med Ethics. 2014 Fall;42(3):344-55. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12151.
9
Evaluation of patient education materials: the example of circulating cell free DNA testing for aneuploidy.患者教育材料评估:以非整倍体循环游离DNA检测为例。
J Genet Couns. 2015 Apr;24(2):259-66. doi: 10.1007/s10897-014-9758-8. Epub 2014 Sep 10.
10
Ethical issues raised by whole genome sequencing.全基因组测序引发的伦理问题。
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2014 Apr;28(2):269-79. doi: 10.1016/j.bpg.2014.02.004. Epub 2014 Mar 12.