Evaluating the Quality of Informed Consent in Clinical Research (임상연구에서 피험자 서면동의의 질 평가)

Jeong Ihnsook (정인숙); 손지홍; Jae-Gook Shin (신재국)

doi:10.35301/ksme.2010.13.1.43

Evaluating the Quality of Informed Consent in Clinical Research

Korean Journal of Medical Ethics
Abbr : 의료윤리
2010, 13(1), pp.43-58
DOI : 10.35301/ksme.2010.13.1.43
Publisher : The Korean Society For Medical Ethics
Research Area : Medicine and Pharmacy > General Medicine
Published : March 31, 2010

Jeong Ihnsook ¹, 손지홍 ², Jae-Gook Shin ²

¹부산대학교
²인제대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

This study was designed to assess the quality of the informed consent process in clinical research by measuring subjects’ understanding of informed consent. A convenience sample of 188 subjects aged 20 and above participated in bioequivalence studies at the Inje regional clinical trial center in Busan (South Korea). The study instruments were self-reported questionnaires, which were modified versions of the Quality of IC (QuIC) questionnaire developed by Joffe et al. (2001) and the Informed Consent Questionnaire-4 items (ICQ-4) developed by Guarino et al. (2006). The data were collected from February to May, 2007 and analyzed with descriptive statistics to assess the quality of the informed consent process and also with a t-test, X2 test, and paired t-test to identify correlates of increased understanding of informed consent. Prior to the subjects’ participation in these clinical trials, the mean QuIC objective knowledge score (QuIC-A) was 68.7 points (maximum: 100 points) and the perceived (subjective) understanding score (QuIC-B) was 78.7; after the clinical trials were completed, the mean scores for (QuIC-A) and (QuIC-B) were 68.7 and 80.4 respectively. The general quality of informed consent (ICQ-4) was measured after the clinical trials were completed; the score was 78.3 points (maximum: 100 points). Higher objective knowledge (QuIC-A) scores were associated with age (25 years old and above, p=0.043), and education (college and above, p=0.001). Higher QuIC-B scores were associated with previous experience with clinical trials (p=0.028) and memorization of the date of the signed consent (p=0.037). The quality of informed consent measured in this study is significantly lower than that reported in similar studies conducted in the US and Australia. Thus, this study suggests that it is there is a need to develop strategies to improve subjects’ understanding of informed consent.

KEYWORDS

informed consent, biomedical research

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

[book] Sugarman J / 1998 / The Nuremberg Code in Ethics of research with human subjects / University Publishing Group : 12~13

[report] / 1979 / Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research / National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research

[other] / 1991 / U.S Department of Health and Human Services / 45 Code of Federal Regulations 46. Fed Reg 1991

[journal] Priestley KA / 1992 / Are patient consent forms for research protocols easy to read? / BMJ 305(6864) : 1263~1264

[journal] Barnett K / 2005 / Randomized study of the impact of different styles of patient information leaflets for randomized controlled trials on children’s understanding / Arch Dis Child 90(4) : 364~366

[journal] Williams MV / 1995 / Inadequate functional health literacy among patients at two public hospitals / JAMA 274(21) : 1677~1682

[journal] Riecken HW / 1982 / Informed consent to biomedical research in veterans administration hospitals / JAMA 248(3) : 344~348

[journal] Joffe S / 2001a / Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey / Lancet 358(9295) : 1772~1777

[journal] Schaeffer MH / 1996 / The impact of disease severity on the informed consent process in clinical research / Am J Med 100(3) : 261~268

[book] / 1996 / Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments / Oxford University Press

[journal] Daugherty C / 1995 / Perceptions of cancer patients and their physicians involved in phase I trials / J Clin Oncol 13(5) : 1062~1072

[journal] Appelbaum PS / 1987 / False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception / Hastings Cent Rep 17(2) : 20~24

[journal] Appelbaum PS / 2004 / Therapeutic misconception in clinical research: frequency and risk factors / IRB 26(2) : 1~8

[thesis] 김양희 / 2008 / 암 임상연구에 참여하는 환자들의 피험자 동의서에 관한 인식조사 / 석사 / 연세대학교

[journal] Joffe S / 2001b / Quality of informed consent: a new measure of understanding among research subjects / J Natl Cancer Inst 93(2) : 139~147

[journal] Guarino P / 2006 / A brief measure of perceived understanding of informed consent in a clinical trial was validated / J Clin Epidemiol 59(6) : 608~614

[journal] Flory J / 2004 / Interventions to improve research participants’understanding in informed consent for research : A systematic review / JAMA 292(13) : 1593~1601

[journal] Ferguson PR / 2002 / Patients’perceptions of information provided in clinical trials / J Med Ethics 28(1) : 45~48

[journal] Moseley TH / 2006 / Effects of presentation method on the understanding of informed consent / Br J Ophthalmol 90(8) : 990~993

[journal] Paris A / 2006 / French adaptation and preliminary validation of a questionnaire to evaluate understanding of informed consent documents in phase I biomedical research / Fundam Clin Pharmacol 20(1) : 97~104

[journal] Jefford M / 2005 / Satisfaction with the decision to participate in cancer clinical trials (CCT) is high, but understanding is a problem / J Clin Oncol 23(16S) : 6067~

[journal] Brauer LH / 2008 / Informed consent in clinical trials: From process to paper / Res Pract 9(1) : 11~16

[journal] Cohn E / 2007 / Improving participant comprehension in the informed consent process / J Nurs Scholarsh 39(3) : 273~280

[book] Dunn CM / 2004 / Protecting study volunteers in research: a manual for investigative sites / CenterWatch : 33~

This paper was written with support from the National Research Foundation of Korea.

KJCKorea
Journal Central

Korean Journal of Medical Ethics 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 1.21

Evaluating the Quality of Informed Consent in Clinical Research

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Korean Journal of Medical Ethics 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 1.21

Evaluating the Quality of Informed Consent in Clinical Research

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

Statistics

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

KCI Citation Counts (12)

REFERENCES (24) * References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Search PDF

Citation

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.