• 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

相似文献

1
When describing harms and benefits to potential trial participants, participant information leaflets are inadequate.在向潜在试验参与者描述危害和获益时,参与者信息单是不够的。
Trials. 2024 May 1;25(1):292. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08087-9.
2
Variation in the extent to which patient information leaflets describe potential benefits and harms of trial interventions: a commentary.患者信息单张描述试验干预潜在益处和危害程度的差异:一篇评论
Trials. 2025 Apr 14;26(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s13063-025-08824-8.
3
Patient information leaflets (PILs) for UK randomised controlled trials: a feasibility study exploring whether they contain information to support decision making about trial participation.英国随机对照试验患者信息传单(PILs):一项探索其是否包含支持参与试验决策的信息的可行性研究。
Trials. 2014 Feb 18;15:62. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-62.
4
Trial participants' self-reported understanding of randomisation phrases in participation information leaflets can be high, but acceptability of some descriptions is low, especially those linked to gambling and luck.试验参与者对参与信息传单中随机分配短语的自我报告理解可能很高,但某些描述的可接受性较低,特别是那些与赌博和运气相关的描述。
Trials. 2024 Jun 18;25(1):391. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08217-3.
5
Retention strategies are routinely communicated to potential trial participants but often differ from what was planned in the trial protocol: an analysis of adult participant information leaflets and their corresponding protocols.保留策略通常会传达给潜在的试验参与者,但往往与试验方案中计划的内容不同:对成年参与者信息传单及其相应方案的分析。
Trials. 2024 Jun 10;25(1):372. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08194-7.
6
Patient information leaflets for placebo-controlled surgical trials: a review of current practice and recommendations for developers.安慰剂对照手术试验的患者信息传单:对现行实践的回顾和对开发者的建议。
Trials. 2024 May 22;25(1):339. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08166-x.
7
Information about dissemination of trial results in patient information leaflets for clinicals trials in the UK and Ireland: The what and the when.关于英国和爱尔兰临床试验中患者信息传单中试验结果传播的信息:内容和时间。
PLoS One. 2022 May 24;17(5):e0268898. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268898. eCollection 2022.
8
Use of participant data and biological samples is insufficiently described in participant information leaflets.参与者信息手册中对参与者数据和生物样本的使用描述不足。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2025 Jan;177:111590. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111590. Epub 2024 Nov 4.
9
Relative importance of informational items in participant information leaflets for trials: a Q-methodology approach.试验参与者信息手册中信息项目的相对重要性:一种Q方法学途径
BMJ Open. 2018 Sep 5;8(9):e023303. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023303.
10
Nocebo effects and participant information leaflets: evaluating information provided on adverse effects in UK clinical trials.否定效应和参与者信息传单:评估英国临床试验中提供的不良反应信息。
Trials. 2020 Jul 17;21(1):658. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04591-w.

引用本文的文献

1
Developing evidence-based guidelines for describing potential benefits and harms within patient information leaflets/sheets (PILs) that inform and do not cause harm (PrinciPILs).制定基于证据的指南,用于在患者信息单页/说明书(PrinciPILs)中描述潜在益处和危害,这些信息单页既能提供信息又不会造成伤害。
Health Technol Assess. 2025 Aug;29(43):1-20. doi: 10.3310/GJJH2402.
2
Variation in the extent to which patient information leaflets describe potential benefits and harms of trial interventions: a commentary.患者信息单张描述试验干预潜在益处和危害程度的差异:一篇评论
Trials. 2025 Apr 14;26(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s13063-025-08824-8.

本文引用的文献

1
Patient reported outcomes and recruitment rates following the introduction of principled patient information leaflets (PrinciPILs): Protocol for a meta-analysis.引入原则性患者信息手册(PrinciPILs)后的患者报告结局及招募率:一项荟萃分析方案
NIHR Open Res. 2023 May 26;3:29. doi: 10.3310/nihropenres.13420.1. eCollection 2023.
2
Trial lay summaries were not fit for purpose.试验摘要不适用。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2023 Apr;156:105-112. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.02.023. Epub 2023 Mar 2.
3
Developing principles for sharing information about potential trial intervention benefits and harms with patients: report of a modified Delphi survey.制定向患者分享潜在试验干预措施获益和风险信息的原则:一项改良德尔菲调查的报告。
Trials. 2022 Oct 8;23(1):863. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06780-1.
4
Getting it wrong most of the time? Comparing trialists' choice of primary outcome with what patients and health professionals want.大多数时候都搞错了?比较试验者对主要结局的选择与患者和卫生专业人员的需求。
Trials. 2022 Jun 27;23(1):537. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06348-z.
5
Information about dissemination of trial results in patient information leaflets for clinicals trials in the UK and Ireland: The what and the when.关于英国和爱尔兰临床试验中患者信息传单中试验结果传播的信息:内容和时间。
PLoS One. 2022 May 24;17(5):e0268898. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268898. eCollection 2022.
6
Anchoring and Judgment Bias: Disregarding Under Uncertainty.锚定与判断偏差:不确定性下的忽视
Psychol Rep. 2022 Oct;125(5):2688-2708. doi: 10.1177/00332941211016750. Epub 2021 May 26.
7
Preparing accessible and understandable clinical research participant information leaflets and consent forms: a set of guidelines from an expert consensus conference.编写易于获取且通俗易懂的临床研究参与者信息手册和同意书:专家共识会议制定的一套指南
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 May 18;7(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00265-2.
8
A systematic review of risk communication in clinical trials: How does it influence decisions to participate and what are the best methods to improve understanding in a trial context?临床试验中的风险沟通系统评价:它如何影响参与决策,以及在试验背景下改善理解的最佳方法是什么?
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 16;15(11):e0242239. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242239. eCollection 2020.
9
Nocebo effects and participant information leaflets: evaluating information provided on adverse effects in UK clinical trials.否定效应和参与者信息传单:评估英国临床试验中提供的不良反应信息。
Trials. 2020 Jul 17;21(1):658. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04591-w.
10
Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice.临床伦理学原则及其在实践中的应用。
Med Princ Pract. 2021;30(1):17-28. doi: 10.1159/000509119. Epub 2020 Jun 4.

在向潜在试验参与者描述危害和获益时,参与者信息单是不够的。

When describing harms and benefits to potential trial participants, participant information leaflets are inadequate.

机构信息

Oncology Day Ward, St. James's Hospital, James Street, Dublin 8, Ireland.

Trials Research and Methodologies Unit (TRAMS), HRB Clinical Research Facility and School of Public Health, 4th Floor Western Gateway Building, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.

出版信息

Trials. 2024 May 1;25(1):292. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08087-9.

DOI:10.1186/s13063-024-08087-9
PMID:38693579
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11061982/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Providing informed consent for trials requires providing trial participants with comprehensive information about the trial, including information about potential risks and benefits. It is required by the ethical principle of respecting patient autonomy. Our study examines the variation in the way information about potential trial benefits and harms is shared in participant information leaflets (PILs).

METHODS

A total of 214 PILs and informed consent forms from clinical trials units (CTUs) and Clinical Research Facilities (CRFs) in Ireland and the UK were assessed by two authors independently, to check the extent to which they adhered to seven recently developed principles. Discrepancies were resolved by a third.

RESULTS

Usage of the seven principles varied widely between PILs regardless of the intended recipient or trial type. None of the PILs used more than four principles, and some (4%) used none. Twenty-seven per cent of PILs presented information about all known potential harms, whereas 45% presented information on all known potential benefits. Some PILs did not provide any potential harms or potential benefits (8%). There was variation in the information contained in adult and children PILs and across disease areas.

CONCLUSION

Significant variation exists in how potential trial benefits and harms are described to potential trial participants in PILs in our sample. Usage of the seven principles of good practice will promote consistency, ensure informed ethical decision-making and invoke trust and transparency. In the long term, a standardised PIL template is needed.

摘要

背景

提供试验知情同意书需要向试验参与者提供有关试验的全面信息,包括有关潜在风险和获益的信息。这是尊重患者自主权的伦理原则所要求的。我们的研究考察了参与者知情同意书中(PIL)关于潜在试验获益和风险信息的分享方式的变化。

方法

我们对来自爱尔兰和英国的临床试验单位(CTU)和临床研究机构(CRF)的 214 份 PIL 和知情同意书进行了两位作者的独立评估,以检查它们在多大程度上符合最近制定的七项原则。分歧由第三位作者解决。

结果

PIL 之间的七个原则的使用情况差异很大,无论其预期接收者或试验类型如何。没有一份 PIL 使用了超过四项原则,有些(4%)则一项都没有使用。27%的 PIL 提供了所有已知潜在危害的信息,而 45%的 PIL 提供了所有已知潜在获益的信息。一些 PIL 没有提供任何潜在的危害或潜在的获益(8%)。成人和儿童 PIL 以及疾病领域之间的信息内容存在差异。

结论

在我们的样本中,PIL 中向潜在试验参与者描述潜在试验获益和风险的方式存在显著差异。七项良好实践原则的使用将促进一致性,确保知情的伦理决策,并激发信任和透明度。从长远来看,需要一个标准化的 PIL 模板。