Suppr超能文献

揭示可读性挑战:对临床试验中同意书可及性的广泛分析

Unveiling readability challenges: An extensive analysis of consent document accessibility in clinical trials.

作者信息

Zai Adrian H, Faro Jamie M, Allison Jeroan

机构信息

Department of Population and Quantitative Health Science, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Transl Sci. 2024 Sep 16;8(1):e125. doi: 10.1017/cts.2024.595. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Clinical research trials rely on informed consent forms (ICFs) to explain all aspects of the study to potential participants. Despite efforts to ensure the readability of ICFs, concerns about their complexity and participant understanding persist. There is a noted gap between Institutional Review Board (IRB) standards and the actual readability levels of ICFs, which often exceed the recommended 8th-grade reading level. This study evaluates the readability of over five thousand ICFs from ClinicalTrials.gov in the USA to assess their literacy levels.

METHODS

We analyzed 5,239 US-based ICFs from ClinicalTrials.gov using readability metrics such as the Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index, and the percentage of difficult words. We examined trends in readability levels across studies initiated from 2005 to 2024.

RESULTS

Most ICFs exceeded the recommended 8th-grade reading level, with an average Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 10.99. While 91% of the ICFs were written above the 8th-grade level, there was an observable improvement in readability, with fewer studies exceeding a 10th-grade reading level in recent years.

CONCLUSIONS

The study reveals a discrepancy between the recommended readability levels and actual ICFs, highlighting a need for simplification. Despite a trend toward improvement in more recent years, ongoing efforts are necessary to ensure ICFs are comprehensible to participants of varied educational backgrounds, reinforcing the ethical integrity of the consent process.

摘要

背景

临床研究试验依靠知情同意书(ICF)向潜在参与者解释研究的各个方面。尽管努力确保ICF的可读性,但对其复杂性和参与者理解程度的担忧依然存在。机构审查委员会(IRB)标准与ICF的实际可读性水平之间存在明显差距,ICF的实际可读性水平往往超过推荐的八年级阅读水平。本研究评估了美国ClinicalTrials.gov上五千多份ICF的可读性,以评估其读写能力水平。

方法

我们使用了诸如弗莱什易读性指数、弗莱什-金凯德年级水平、冈宁雾度指数和难词百分比等可读性指标,分析了ClinicalTrials.gov上5239份美国的ICF。我们研究了2005年至2024年启动的各项研究的可读性水平趋势。

结果

大多数ICF超过了推荐的八年级阅读水平,平均弗莱什-金凯德年级水平为10.99。虽然91%的ICF的写作水平高于八年级,但可读性有明显改善,近年来超过十年级阅读水平的研究较少。

结论

该研究揭示了推荐的可读性水平与实际ICF之间的差异,突出了简化的必要性。尽管近年来有改善的趋势,但仍需持续努力,以确保不同教育背景的参与者都能理解ICF,加强同意过程的伦理完整性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/82bf/11428065/69958da10ec5/S2059866124005958_fig1.jpg

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