Impact of French 'Comités de Protection des Personnes' on the readability of informed consent documents (ICD) in biomedical research: more information, but not better information

Information is the keystone to the participation of subjects in biomedical research. Clear comprehension of the informed consent documents (ICDs) is primordial and a necessary requirement is that they are readable. While submission of a protocol to a French 'Comités de Protection des Personnes' (CPP) is a mandatory step with regard to the French legislation on biomedical research, no published data are available concerning its influence on ICDs readability. The aim of our study was to determine the impact of French CPP on the readability of ICDs, using lexico-syntactic readability indexes and ICDs from four clinical research centres and one clinical research unit. Twenty-five ICDs were analysed. The Flesch score was not modified after CPP review, while the Cordial score was significantly lower [from 4 (1-14) to 1 (1-13), P = 0.014]. The information was longer and more complex following CPP review. No protocol characteristics had any impact on the variation before and after review for either the Flesch or the Cordial indexes, nor on the number of syllables per word. Changes in the total number of words before and after review varied considerably between study centre, supporting heterogeneity of CPP review. Since August 2004, French CPP have to study the intelligibility of ICDs in addition to the scientific and ethic aspects of a research. We show that their current reviews do not increase the readability, while increasing the length of ICDs.     

Informed Consent for Medical Research: Common Discrepancies and Readability

Objective: To identify common discrepancies and average reading grade levels for informed consent forms (ICFs) us submitted to institutional review boards (IRBs) by medical researchers.
Methods: A retrospective evaluation of ICFs as submitted to IRBs of 3 university-affiliated hospitals during a I-year period. ICF content was evaluated using a checklist of 23 requirements specified in the federal regulations governing human research. Documents then were computer-analyzed to determine the readability scores using 2 common indexes of comprehension. A discrepancy was defined as any instance in which an ICF did not address an applicable requirement in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Results: Eighty-two ICFs representing 16 medical specialties were evaluated; 8 (10%) were from emergency medicine. Eighteen ICFs (22%) were conspicuously incomplete, lacking 29 federal requirements. The mean number of discrepancies was 4.7 (95% CI, 3.9–5.5) Common omissions included: a statement about who is doing the research, number of subjects in the study, circumstances when a subject's participation may be terminated, disclosure of alternative procedures, and notice to subjects regarding new findings. The mean Flesch grade level required to read all ICFs was 13.8 (95% CI, 13.5–14.2), implying that the majority of the U.S. adult population would be unable to comprehend these forms.
Conclusion: Designing a consent form to meet all of the federal requirements while maintaining a level of reading comprehension suitable for the general population is a difficult task for investigators.     

Effectiveness of a writing improvement intervention program on the readability of the research informed consent document.

BACKGROUND: Problems with the comprehensibility of human research informed consent have been documented since the 1970s, and efforts aimed at rewriting consents have not been successful in consistently producing more readable consents. This study employed researched principles of reading comprehension research to create writing intervention program designed to help the research writer produce more comprehensible informed consent documents. The purpose of this study was to determine if this intervention program was effective. METHOD: The key component of the writing improvement intervention packet was a newly formatted consent form that contained annotated instructions for researchers on how to write each section for optimum comprehension. The resulting consent forms were evaluated using a Readability and Processability Form (RPF). The RPF is based on reading research and includes the Fry Scale, which yields an approximate grade reading level. The RPF assigned points to each of the 20 areas of comprehension analysis according to strict scoring criteria, and target scores were established by the authors in consultation with the hospital institutional review board. RESULTS: We evaluated 66 post-intervention informed consents. The mean readability and processability score was 62, resulting in the RPF classification of "good." The established readability and processability target range was good to excellent or 61-100 points; 66% of the forms scored in this range. In our 1995 pre-intervention study, the corresponding score was 12%. The target range for grade reading level was 8th grade: 53% scored in that range as compared with 4% in 1995. A question-by-question analysis of each of the 20 checklist items on the RPF identified important aspects of the consent writing that improved and others that were still weak and needed improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The Hartford Hospital writing improvement intervention program was associated with the production of more comprehensible informed consent documents. Using the intervention materials, investigators from a variety of departments could function independently to produce readable consent forms. This program may help others who wish to assist their research departments in creating consents that are written for optimal reading comprehension.     

Readability and information density in biomedical research

OBJECTIVE: This study was performed in order to compare the lexicosyntactic readability, and the information density in the informed consent forms used in biomedical research, in comparison with standard scientific texts dedicated to the general population. In addition, we studied whether there is a correlation between information readability and density. METHODS: Fifteen informed consent forms, 6 articles from "Sciences et Avenir" and 6 articles from "Sciences et Vie Junior" were analyzed. The lexicosyntactic readability was calculated using the Flesh score, and the information density using the number of information bits related to the number of words. RESULTS: The lexicosyntactic readability was lower in the informed consent forms (25, 17-32) compared with "Sciences et Avenir" (32, 29-38), but even higher in "Sciences et Vie Junior" (42, 38-57). Conversely, the information density was similar in "Sciences et Vie Junior" (0.24, [0.21-0.27]) and the informed consent forms (0.24, [0.22-0.26]), but higher in "Sciences et Avenir" (0.32, [0.26-0.38]). CONCLUSION: Informed consent forms are less readable, but paradoxically less dense than scientific papers dedicated to the general population. There is no correlation between density and readability.     

Assessing readability and comprehension of informed consent materials for medical device research: A survey of informed consents from FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health

Legally effective informed consent has been a long-standing requirement for FDA-regulated clinical studies. However, informed consent forms (ICFs) are often thought to be too long, too complex, and too difficult for participants to understand. In this article, investigators from the FDAs Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) surveyed 399 ICFs from approved investigational device exemption (IDE) applications for fiscal years 2015 and 2016 to evaluate the readability of ICFs.The investigators collected data from the ICFs, using variables related to structure, readability, and comprehension.The investigators found that the mean grade-reading levels of the ICFs ranged from 10th grade to college level (Table 2), higher than the recommended 6th to 8th grade level, when measured by major readability evaluation tools (the SMOG readability grade level formula, the Flesch-Kincaid Index Grade Level Readability Formula, the Flesch Reading Ease test, and the Dale-Chall readability formula).Overall, the ICFs and informed consent (IC) processes, as described in the IDE application, lacked components that enhanced participants' comprehension, such as short sentences (e.g., no more than 8 to 10 to words) and the use of pictures, tables, and diagrams.CDRH investigators believe that information about ICFs' readability, comprehension, and structure will help support current and future efforts to improve the IC process. The intent of the article is to demonstrate that improvements are needed in the IC process and to encourage clinical trial stakeholders to consider implementing those approaches that optimize patient comprehension in the development of their IC processes.     

Readability of Participant Informed Consent Forms and Informational Documents: From Phase 3 COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials in the United States

ObjectiveTo assess the readability of the informed consent forms from the phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine trials conducted in the United States.Patients and MethodsEnglish consent forms were used for patients in phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials. Consent forms were obtained in October 2020. Using Microsoft Word tools, we analyzed the readability (ie, the ease of reading) of written consent forms and informational documents from phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials in the United States from the following manufacturers: AstraZeneca, Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and Novavax.ResultsOwing to low readability and several format factors, this study determined that none of the consent forms or informational documents from the recent phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials conducted in the United States met readability standards at the recommended 7th grade readability level for the average vaccine research volunteer in any readability category. The average English-speaking vaccine trial volunteer would have great difficulty comprehending the information provided in the consent forms and informational documents. To ensure that study subjects receive and fully comprehend information regarding a clinical study and can provide reliable consent, greater attention should be given to the development and use of simplified consent forms, multimedia formatting, personal discussion, and comprehension assessments.     

A strategy for learning principles and elements of informed consent

Nurses frequently provide potential study participants with informed consent forms and information regarding involvement in research studies However, there is little information in the nursing literature that emphasizes how to evaluate informed consent documents for appropriateness. The authors present an instructional project for critiquing informed consent documents for content, clarity, readability, and conciseness.     

Barriers to informed consent

OBJECTIVES: To provide oncology nurses with a review of barriers that may limit the ability of adults to provide informed consent. DATA SOURCES: Published articles, research studies, and review articles pertaining to informed consent and clinical research. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-centered barriers to informed consent (such as age, education, and illness) and process-centered barriers (such as content and readability of the consent form, timing of discussion, and amount of time allotted to the process) can affect an individual's ability to provide substantial informed consent. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Oncology nurses must be aware and knowledgeable of the various barriers to informed consent to minimize these barriers and to improve and facilitate the informed consent process.     

French adaptation and preliminary validation of a questionnaire to evaluate understanding of informed consent documents in phase I biomedical research

The content of informed consent documents (ICD) is a crucial element in the process of providing information to participants in biomedical research. Clear comprehension of the information, i.e. the ability to understand its meaning and its consequences, is of utmost importance. The objective of this study was to describe the different steps in the French adaptation and preliminary validation of the Qualité de Compréhension des Formulaires d'information et de consentement (QCFic) questionnaire (http://www.lyon.inserm.fr/cic-grenoble) based on the American Quality of Informed Consent (QuIC) questionnaire. Adaptation and preliminary validation of the QuIC for use in France was composed of five principal steps: translation, scientific validation, lexical validation, edition of gold-standard answers and a pilot study. Each stage was conducted by independent groups of experts, under the coordination of the study board. Thirteen questions were added and one was suppressed. Two steps were required for the scientific validation and for lexical validation, 21 modifications were proposed. Relative to gold-standard answers, the three experts gave the same answer for 24 questions and for nine other questions, two of the three gave identical answers, which were validated by the study board. Results of a pilot study showed a global QCFic score of 88.99 (84.13-90.92) and no specific commentary was made about the content of the questions, so no more modification needed to be made. A preliminary validated French questionnaire, the QCFic, is now available to evaluate the quality of an informed consent document in phase I clinical trials. It is quick and easy to use.     

Randomization to standard and concise informed consent forms: development of evidence-based consent practices

BackgroundConsent to participate in research is an important component of the conduct of ethical clinical trials. Current consent practices are largely policy-driven. This study was conducted to assess comprehension of study information and satisfaction with the consent form between subjects randomized to concise or to standard informed consent forms as one approach to developing evidence-based consent practices.MethodsParticipants (N = 111) who enrolled into two Phase I investigational influenza vaccine protocols (VRC 306 and VRC 307) at the NIH Clinical Center were randomized to one of two IRB-approved consents; either a standard or concise form. Concise consents had an average of 63% fewer words. All other aspects of the consent process were the same. Questionnaires about the study and the consent process were completed at enrollment and at the last visit in both studies.ResultsSubjects using concise consent forms scored as well as those using standard length consents in measures of comprehension (7 versus 7, p = 0.79 and 20 versus 21, p = 0.13), however, the trend was for the concise consent group to report feeling better informed. Both groups thought the length and detail of the consent form were appropriate.ConclusionsRandomization of study subjects to different length IRB-approved consent forms as one method for developing evidence-based consent practices, resulted in no differences in study comprehension or satisfaction with the consent form. A concise consent form may be used ethically in the context of a consent process conducted by well-trained staff with opportunities for discussion and education throughout the study.     

Comprehension of information for informed consent by spouses of surgical patients

The adequacy of comprehension of the information needed for informed consent to participate in research on spouse responses to a husband's or wife's general surgery was assessed. Comprehension of information about the research study by 75 spouses was measured by the Informed Consent Questionnaire containing questions on study purpose, time involvement, nature of participation, risks, benefits, voluntariness, confidentiality, and anonymity. The result showed that 72 of the 75 spouses had adequate comprehension of the information for informed consent. Because adequate comprehension is atypical of most studies, possible reasons for this unexpected result are discussed and then explained within a self-determination theory of informed consent.     

Factors influencing comprehension of information for informed consent: ethical implications for nursing research

Empirical studies on comprehension of information for informed consent show that research subjects often do not understand major portions of that to which they have consented. This raises the ethical question of whether or not the consent process has accomplished its purpose — the protection of the individual's right to self-determination. This article focuses on the following factors derived from the research literature that influence comprehension of information for informed consent: the nature of information, method of presentation of information, demographic factors, and personal factors. From these factors and methodological considerations, ethical implications for nursing research are addressed.     

Evaluating the quality of information about alternatives to research participation in oncology consent forms

A careful consideration of the alternatives to research participation is an essential element of making an informed choice to enroll in a biomedical research study. While there is general agreement on the importance of informing prospective subjects about alternatives to research participation, little is known about how investigators communicate this information. The purpose of this study was to attempt to assess the quality of information about alternatives contained in informed consent documents in oncology randomized controlled trials. Our study indicates that there is room for improvement concerning the discussion of alternatives to research participation in informed consent documents in oncology randomized controlled trials. Though most of the documents in our study met the minimal disclosure standard found in the U.S. federal regulations, less than a third met the reasonable person standard, a widely accepted principle endorsed by the common law and various ethics guidelines and documents. There was a statistically significant difference between the alternative discussions in local and model forms (P < 0.0014). The alternatives discussions in local informed consent documents were more likely to receive higher scores than those in model consent documents, with an odds-ratio of 3.5 to 1.     

Discrepancy between older clients' ability to read and comprehend and the reading level of written educational materials used by occupational therapists.

OBJECTIVE: The match between the reading level of occupational therapy education materials and older clients' reading ability and comprehension was determined. The sociodemographic and literacy characteristics that influenced clients' reading ability and comprehension were investigated. METHOD: The reading level of 110 written education materials (handouts, brochures, and information leaflets), distributed to older clients (65 years of age and older) by occupational therapists working in Queensland hospitals, was analyzed using the Flesch formula. The reading ability of 214 older persons (mean age 77 years, 63% female) was assessed using the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine. Participants' comprehension of information of increasing reading difficulty was measured using the Cloze procedure. RESULTS: The written materials required a mean reading level between the ninth and tenth grades. Participants' mean reading ability was seventh to eighth grade. Therefore some materials may have been too difficult for participants to read and understand. Participants with a managerial or professional or clerical background (p= 0.001) and those who perceived they read well (p= 0.001) had a significantly higher reading ability. Older age was significantly related to poorer comprehension (p = 0.018), with participants 75 years of age and over having a mean comprehension score of 25.6 compared to 30.3 for those 65 to 74 years of age. CONCLUSION: Occupational therapists must analyze the reading level of the written education materials they develop for and use with clients by applying readability formulas. There should be a match between the reading level of written materials and clients' reading ability. Clients' reading ability may be assessed informally by discussing years of education and literacy habits or formally using reading assessments. Content and design characteristics should be considered when developing written education materials for clients.     

Ethics in clinical research: need for assessing comprehension of informed consent form?

Comprehension of informed consent form has not achieved the attention it deserves. We made a 24-item questionnaire to assess clinical research participants' comprehension of informed consent form (Contemp Clin Trials 2009;30:427-30). Due to repeated requests by clinical researchers in our country and abroad, we are publishing the questionnaire in this article.     

Perception of written and oral information by 50 healthy volunteers from a monocentric study

The purpose of this survey in 50 healthy volunteers from a single-centre study was to assess from a questionnaire filled in by the participants, their comprehension and evaluation of the written and oral information and the legal framework, as well as their uncertainty regarding participation, in terms of age, gender and profession. Overall satisfaction with regard to comprehension and oral information was recorded, but 42% of volunteers considered the informed consent form too long and one-quarter of them did not read it completely. Knowledge of the legal framework (20%) did not influence either their understanding or hesitation to participate. The hesitant individuals (26%) more often judged this framework to be reassuring than the non-hesitant individuals (77% versus 38%; p = 0.015). These findings concerned females, medics or paramedics and younger individuals (< or =35 years). In individuals who do not give their consent, it would be interesting to study the reasons for refusal to participate and the influence of the ethical and legal framework in clinical trials in enhancing the patients' partnership in a context of evidence-based medicine.     

Informed Consent and Ethical Issues in Military Medical Research

Informed consent in military research shares many of the same fundamental principles and regulations that govern civilian biomedical research. In fact, much of modern research ethics is grounded in events that occurred in the context of war or government‐sponsored research. Despite these similarities and common origins, research in the military has additional requirements designed to preserve service members' informed consent rights. The special nature of the superior–subordinate relationship in the military necessitates careful protections to avoid perceptions of coercion or undue influence on a military subject. Additionally, current legal and regulatory requirements for advanced informed consent significantly restrict the flexibility of the military to conduct research using waiver of consent. This has implications on the ability of the nation to develop effective medical treatments for the global war on terrorism. Nevertheless, work is under way to realign defense research policy with the norms of civilian biomedical practice. Future directions include the adoption of waivers for military emergency research, and the cautious introduction of human subject studies on the battlefield. This paper discusses historical background, regulatory differences, and concerns and challenges of some of these regulatory differences for research personnel that apply to informed consent and waiver of said informed consent for emergency research conducted by the U.S. military.     

The nurse's role in the informed consent process

OBJECTIVES: To review the informed consent process in relation to oncology nursing roles and responsibilities, patient comprehension, cultural sensitivity, and qualitative methodologies. DATA SOURCES: Scientific and review articles, regulatory documents, and texts relating to informed consent. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing is involved in almost every aspect of the informed consent process. To be effective, nurses must be knowledgeable about fundamental concepts associated with informed consent and corresponding responsibilities and willing to address the complexities of the informed consent process. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Situations related to informed consent provide challenges and opportunities for professional growth. Keeping abreast of the evolving standards and concepts of informed consent enhances the essential roles that nurses play in clinically based research.