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.     

Assessing the readability statistics of national consent forms in the UK

Introduction: When obtaining consent for an invasive procedure, the patient needs to understand what is happening to them in broad terms. Best medical practice advocates that written consent is given to acknowledge patient agreement. Across the UK, the Department of Health has provided standard consent forms for obtaining consent in all situations. Potentially these written sources of information may not be comprehended by patients and thus invalidate consent. Method: Consent forms were assessed by the Flesch readability and Flesch‐Kincaid grade formulae and compared with the national reading age, the recommended level for patient medical information, three newspaper articles and a journal article. Results: The consent forms have acceptable statistics [average Flesch readability 61.1 (range 57.2–66.1) and Flesch‐Kincaid grade 7 (range 6.3–8)]. This grade, however, is above the recommended level of patient health information (Flesch‐Kincaid grade 6). When the patient statements are isolated the reading statistics worsen [average Flesch readability 52.6 (range 41–62.6) and Flesch‐Kincaid grade 9.6 (range 7.9–11.1)]. Conclusion: Consent forms should be used as adjuncts to detailed conversations, describing what a procedure involves to ensure that a patient understands, in broad terms, what is happening to them. The patient’s statement section of the form may be being written at a level above patient comprehension currently and thus could invalidate any consent given. We would advocate a documented conversation with patients to ensure they have a broad understanding of the procedure and using the consent form as an adjunct to this discussion. The patient’s statement section should be re‐written to avoid invalidating consent.     

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.     

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 of Invasive Procedure Consent Forms

Background

Informed consent is a pillar of ethical medicine which requires patients to fully comprehend relevant issues including the risks, benefits, and alternatives of an intervention. Given the average reading skill of US adults is at the 8th grade level, the American Medical Association (AMA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) recommend patient information materials should not exceed a 6th grade reading level. We hypothesized that text provided in invasive procedure consent forms would exceed recommended readability guidelines for medical information.

Materials and methods

To test this hypothesis, we gathered procedure consent forms from all surgical inpatient hospitals in the state of Rhode Island. For each consent form, readability analysis was measured with the following measures: Flesch Reading Ease Formula, Flesch–Kincaid Grade Level, Fog Scale, SMOG Index, Coleman–Liau Index, Automated Readability Index, and Linsear Write Formula. These readability scores were used to calculate a composite Text Readability Consensus Grade Level.

Results

Invasive procedure consent forms were found to be written at an average of 15th grade level (i.e., third year of college), which is significantly higher than the average US adult reading level of 8th grade (p < 0.0001) and the AMA/NIH recommended readability guidelines for patient materials of 6th grade (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Invasive procedure consent forms have readability levels which makes comprehension difficult or impossible for many patients. Efforts to improve the readability of procedural consent forms should improve patient understanding regarding their healthcare decisions.     

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 assessment of internet-based consumer health information

BACKGROUND: A substantial amount of consumer health-related information is available on the Internet. Studies suggest that consumer comprehension may be compromised if content exceeds a 7th-grade reading level, which is the average American reading level identified by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (USDHHS). OBJECTIVE: To determine the readability of Internet-based consumer health information offered by organizations that represent the top 5 medical-related causes of death in America. We hypothesized that the average readability (reading grade level) of Internet-based consumer health information on heart disease, cancer, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes would exceed the USDHHS recommended reading level. METHODS: From the Web sites of the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, American Lung Association, American Diabetes Association, and American Stroke Association we randomly gathered 100 consumer-health-information articles. We assessed each article with 3 readability-assessment tools: SMOG (Simple Measure of Gobbledygook), Gunning FOG (Frequency of Gobbledygook), and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. We also categorized the articles per the USDHHS readability categories: easy to read (below 6th-grade level), average difficulty (7th to 9th grade level), and difficult (above 9th-grade level). RESULTS: Most of the articles exceeded the 7th-grade reading level and were in the USDHHS "difficult" category. The mean +/- SD readability score ranges were: SMOG 11.80 +/- 2.44 to 14.40 +/- 1.47, Flesch-Kincaid 9.85 +/- 2.25 to 11.55 +/- 0.76, and Gunning FOG 13.10 +/- 3.42 to 16.05 +/- 2.31. The articles from the American Lung Association had the lowest reading-level scores with each of the readability-assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support that Web-based medical information intended for consumer use is written above USDHHS recommended reading levels. Compliance with these recommendations may increase the likelihood of consumer comprehension.     

Critical evaluation of informed consent forms for adult and minor aged whole blood donation used by United States blood centers

BACKGROUND: Blood donation is a medical procedure with attendant risks, and thus blood donors should undergo acceptable informed consent. There are no guidelines for the informed consent forms (ICFs) for whole blood donors or for parental consent forms (PCFs) for minor age blood donors. The goal of the study was to determine if the majority of the generally accepted elements of informed consent are provided to volunteer allogeneic whole blood donors in the United States.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: ICFs and PCFs along with their accompanying general information forms (GIFs) from nonmilitary blood collection establishments for allogeneic whole blood donation were collected throughout the United States and scored using a system based on the essential elements of informed consent derived from guidelines of consent for research subjects. The overall score for each ICF and PCF was obtained.
RESULTS: Twenty-one ICFs and 37 PCFs from 48 states representing major collection centers within the United States were scored. The mean score for the common essential elements ICFs was 35 percent (range, 10%-80%) and for PCFs was 46 percent (range, 10%-90%).
CONCLUSION: None of the whole blood allogeneic donation informed consents surveyed contained all the common essential or specific blood donation information desired. There is a need for national guidelines for the informed consent process for both the donor and the parent of a minor to ensure adequate information is specified.     

Genetic testing and informed consent

OBJECTIVES: To discuss unique issues related to cancer predisposition genetic testing and informed consent. DATA SOURCES: Published professional articles, review articles, research articles, clinical practice, position statements, websites, and textbooks. CONCLUSIONS: The discovery of germline mutations that confer a predisposition for the development of cancer will continue. The provision of adequate information is central to the process of genetic counseling and testing so that individuals may give informed consent and make choices appropriate to their own specific circumstances. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: The use of genetic information for the management of cancer will impact the practice of all oncology nurses in the coming years. Knowledge of genes that predispose for cancer and standards that delineate essential components of quality care during the informed consent process is vital.     

Improving understanding of the informed consent process and document

OBJECTIVES: To review theoretical perspectives relating to the communication of informed consent and to describe research efforts and strategies to enhance the informed consent process and document. DATA SOURCES: Research studies review articles, education and communication models, and NCI National Working Group on Informed Consent Recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Information communicated during the informed consent process is difficult to understand, raising ethical concerns about whether informed decision-making has taken place. Empirical research focuses on the nature of patient-provider interactions and the effectiveness of various delivery systems, a need exists to overcome conceptual and methodologic limitations. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Nurses must ensure that patients understand informed consent information. Several communication strategies are posited.     

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.     

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.     

Improvement of the comprehension of written information given to healthy volunteers in biomedical research: a single-blind randomized controlled study

Writing an informed consent form (ICF) for biomedical research is a difficult task. We conducted a multicenter single-blind randomized controlled trial to identify whether a working group or the systematic improvement in lexico-syntactic readability or an association of the two could increase the comprehension of the written information given to healthy volunteers enrolled in biomedical research. Participants were randomized to read one of four versions of the ICF: unchanged ICF (A), ICF with systematic lexico-syntactic readability improvement (B), ICF modified by a working group (C), and ICF modified by the working group followed by systematic lexico-syntactic improvement (D). The primary end-point was the objective comprehension score at day 0 for each study group. The scores of objective comprehension at day 0 were statistically different between the four study groups (anovaP = 0.020). The pairwise analysis showed an improvement in the working group vs. the unchanged group (P = 0.003), and a tendency to improvement in the group who read the ICF modified using lexico-syntactic readability and in the group who read the ICF modified using the two methods (P = 0.020 and 0.027 respectively). We conducted a two-way anova to identify some characteristics of the population which could explain this score. There was a significant interaction between the type of informed consent document (ICD) and the gender. Improving the ICD in phase I biomedical research leads to better comprehension, whether the method used is systematic lexico-syntactic improvement or a review by a working group. The improvement is specifically observed in men compared with women. Conversely, while both methods diverge in their effect on lexico-syntactic readability, their association is not mandatory. We suggest that in all phase I clinical trials, the ICF be improved by either method.     

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.     

Understanding informed consent.

Understanding and facilitating the informed consent process is our duty as perioperative nurses. Acting as patient advocates, we must determine if our patients have given "informed consent" prior to surgical treatment. When we witness our patients signing consent forms, we must be sure they are competent to sign; that they have spoken with the physician and have discussed the proposed procedure (including the risks, benefits and alternative treatments) and have had their questions answered; and have read the consent form they are being asked to sign. As nurses, we must become aware of our responsibilities related to informed consent. By understanding the concept of informed consent and its legal implications, we will be able not only to the facilitate informed consent process but also to fulfill our legal responsibilities.     

Evaluation of informed consent: a pilot study

AIM: This paper is a report of a study to describe and analyse the use of informed consent in clinical research, from the point of view of voluntary adult research participants, in order to develop and test an interview schedule for the evaluation of informed consent. BACKGROUND: Informed consent is one of the central ethical research principles in healthcare research, but empirical research on this topic is still scarce. To evaluate and develop the ethical quality of scientific research, there is a need to explore the meaning and implications of informed consent for research participants. METHOD: The data were collected in 2004 by interviews using an interview schedule created for this study by the first author and discussed in a multidisciplinary group. The response rate was 81%. The sample consisted of 32 patients with a metabolic syndrome who were participants in a project evaluating the effects of betaine on cardiovascular risk factors. FINDINGS: Participants stated that the key elements of informed consent are information, understanding and decision-making, and that competence is an essential factor in the reception and understanding of information and making an independent decision about participation. Our interview schedule was found to be useful in the investigation of informed consent. CONCLUSION: This study strengthened the perception that more extensive research about research participants is needed.