Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Jul 23:3:38.
doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-3-38.

Can patient decision aids help people make good decisions about participating in clinical trials? A study protocol

Affiliations

Can patient decision aids help people make good decisions about participating in clinical trials? A study protocol

Jamie C Brehaut et al. Implement Sci. .

Abstract

Background: Evidence shows that the standard process for obtaining informed consent in clinical trials can be inadequate, with study participants frequently not understanding even basic information fundamental to giving informed consent. Patient decision aids are effective decision support tools originally designed to help patients make difficult treatment or screening decisions. We propose that incorporating decision aids into the informed consent process will improve the extent to which participants make decisions that are informed and consistent with their preferences. A mixed methods study will test this proposal.

Methods: Phase one of this project will involve assessment of a stratified random sample of 50 consent documents from recently completed investigator-initiated clinical trials, according to existing standards for supporting good decision making. Phase two will involve interviews of a purposive sample of 50 trial participants (10 participants from each of five different clinical areas) about their experience of the informed consent process, and how it could be improved. In phase three, we will convert consent forms for two completed clinical trials into decision aids and pilot test these new tools using a user-centered design approach, an iterative development process commonly employed in computer usability literature. In phase four, we will conduct a pilot observational study comparing the new tools to standard consent forms, with potential recruits to two hypothetical clinical trials. Outcomes will include knowledge of key aspects of the decision, knowledge of the probabilities of different outcomes, decisional conflict, the hypothetical participation decision, and qualitative impressions of the experience.

Discussion: This work will provide initial evidence about whether a patient decision aid can improve the informed consent process. The larger goal of this work is to examine whether study recruitment can be improved from (barely) informed consent based on disclosure-oriented documents, towards a process of high-quality participant decision-making.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law. Vol. 10. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office; 1949. pp. 181–182.
    1. World Medical Organization Declaration of Helsinki. British Medical Journal. 1996;313:1448–9.
    1. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. 2006. http://www.wma.net/e/policy/b3htm
    1. Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1994.
    1. Faden R, Beauchamp T. A history and theory of informed consent. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1986.