Offering patients entry in clinical trials: preliminary study of the views of prospective participants
- PMID: 8863148
- PMCID: PMC1377002
- DOI: 10.1136/jme.22.4.227
Offering patients entry in clinical trials: preliminary study of the views of prospective participants
Abstract
Objective: To ascertain attitudes to different methods of obtaining informed consent for randomised clinical trials (RCTs).
Design: Structured interviews with members of the public, medical secretaries and medical students.
Setting: The public were approached in a variety of public places. Medical secretaries and students were approached in their place of work.
Subjects: Fifty members of the public, 25 secretaries and 25 students.
Main outcome measures: Views on RCTs were elicited, with particular emphasis on how subjects thought the concept of randomisation should be explained. Each participant was presented with descriptions of proposed clinical trials and asked to select his or her preference from a range of options.
Results: Written information was preferred over verbal information in 91% of replies. Most respondents (86%) would prefer to sign a consent form. Of the seven statements explaining randomisation, a significant difference was found in favour of explanations that were less explicit about the play of chance (ANOVA; p = 0.0004). Eighty-three per cent of participants thought that randomised trials were morally acceptable when there was no prior medical preference between treatments. However, over half (55%) thought they would find it upsetting to be offered entry in such a trial and a quarter thought the outcome of treatment might be adversely affected.
Conclusions: Our results offer some support for the idea that "economy with truth" is less unsettling than a frank description of the stark reality of what randomisation means. It is a matter of debate as to whether, if we are correct, autonomy should have precedence over beneficence. The offer of entry in a clinical trial is likely to affect the experience of care for many people, especially if the process of randomisation is described explicitly. Potential participants should be given a detailed written explanation of the rationale for the trial and be asked to sign a consent form if they agree to take part.
Similar articles
-
Lay public's understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials.Health Technol Assess. 2005 Mar;9(8):1-192, iii-iv. doi: 10.3310/hta9080. Health Technol Assess. 2005. PMID: 15763039
-
Study of cohort-specific consent and patient control in phase I cancer trials.J Clin Oncol. 1998 Jul;16(7):2305-12. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.7.2305. J Clin Oncol. 1998. PMID: 9667244 Clinical Trial.
-
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.Trials. 2024 Jun 18;25(1):391. doi: 10.1186/s13063-024-08217-3. Trials. 2024. PMID: 38890748 Free PMC article.
-
Improvement of informed consent and the quality of consent documents.Lancet Oncol. 2008 May;9(5):485-93. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70128-1. Lancet Oncol. 2008. PMID: 18452859 Review.
-
Ethical considerations.Epilepsy Res Suppl. 1993;10:137-48. Epilepsy Res Suppl. 1993. PMID: 8251089 Review. No abstract available.
Cited by
-
"Hello, hello--it's English I speak!": a qualitative exploration of patients' understanding of the science of clinical trials.J Med Ethics. 2005 Nov;31(11):664-9. doi: 10.1136/jme.2004.011064. J Med Ethics. 2005. PMID: 16269566 Free PMC article.
-
Recruitment of ethnic minorities into cancer clinical trials: experience from the front lines.Br J Cancer. 2012 Sep 25;107(7):1017-21. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.240. Epub 2012 May 31. Br J Cancer. 2012. PMID: 23011540 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Reasons for accepting or declining to participate in randomized clinical trials for cancer therapy.Br J Cancer. 2000 Jun;82(11):1783-8. doi: 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1142. Br J Cancer. 2000. PMID: 10839291 Free PMC article.
-
Patients' perceptions of information provided in clinical trials.J Med Ethics. 2002 Feb;28(1):45-8. doi: 10.1136/jme.28.1.45. J Med Ethics. 2002. PMID: 11834760 Free PMC article.
-
Quantifying the recruitment challenges with couple-based interventions for cancer: applications to early-stage breast cancer.Psychooncology. 2009 Jun;18(6):667-73. doi: 10.1002/pon.1477. Psychooncology. 2009. PMID: 19061201 Free PMC article.
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical