Asset Details
MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Interactive Informed Consent: Randomized Comparison with Paper Consents
by
Rowbotham, Michael C.
, Cummings, Steven R.
, Astin, John
, Greene, Kaitlin
in
Audiovisual Aids - standards
/ Cancer
/ Chemotherapy
/ Clinical trials
/ Clinical Trials as Topic - methods
/ Comparative analysis
/ Comprehension
/ Computer Science
/ Consent Forms - standards
/ Consents
/ Humans
/ Informed consent
/ Informed Consent - psychology
/ Informed Consent - standards
/ Interactive systems
/ Internet
/ Medical research
/ Medicine
/ Online Systems
/ Patients
/ Prospective Studies
/ Random Allocation
/ Randomization
/ Research Subjects - psychology
/ Review boards
/ Science Policy
/ Social and Behavioral Sciences
/ Studies
/ User experience
2013
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Interactive Informed Consent: Randomized Comparison with Paper Consents
by
Rowbotham, Michael C.
, Cummings, Steven R.
, Astin, John
, Greene, Kaitlin
in
Audiovisual Aids - standards
/ Cancer
/ Chemotherapy
/ Clinical trials
/ Clinical Trials as Topic - methods
/ Comparative analysis
/ Comprehension
/ Computer Science
/ Consent Forms - standards
/ Consents
/ Humans
/ Informed consent
/ Informed Consent - psychology
/ Informed Consent - standards
/ Interactive systems
/ Internet
/ Medical research
/ Medicine
/ Online Systems
/ Patients
/ Prospective Studies
/ Random Allocation
/ Randomization
/ Research Subjects - psychology
/ Review boards
/ Science Policy
/ Social and Behavioral Sciences
/ Studies
/ User experience
2013
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Interactive Informed Consent: Randomized Comparison with Paper Consents
by
Rowbotham, Michael C.
, Cummings, Steven R.
, Astin, John
, Greene, Kaitlin
in
Audiovisual Aids - standards
/ Cancer
/ Chemotherapy
/ Clinical trials
/ Clinical Trials as Topic - methods
/ Comparative analysis
/ Comprehension
/ Computer Science
/ Consent Forms - standards
/ Consents
/ Humans
/ Informed consent
/ Informed Consent - psychology
/ Informed Consent - standards
/ Interactive systems
/ Internet
/ Medical research
/ Medicine
/ Online Systems
/ Patients
/ Prospective Studies
/ Random Allocation
/ Randomization
/ Research Subjects - psychology
/ Review boards
/ Science Policy
/ Social and Behavioral Sciences
/ Studies
/ User experience
2013
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Interactive Informed Consent: Randomized Comparison with Paper Consents
Journal Article
Interactive Informed Consent: Randomized Comparison with Paper Consents
2013
Request Book From Autostore
and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Informed consent is the cornerstone of human research subject protection. Many subjects sign consent documents without understanding the study purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, and their rights. Proof of comprehension is not required and rarely obtained. Understanding might improve by using an interactive system with multiple options for hearing, viewing and reading about the study and the consent form at the subject's own pace with testing and immediate feedback. This prospective randomized study compared the IRB-approved paper ICF for an actual clinical research study with an interactive presentation of the same study and its associated consent form using an iPad device in two populations: clinical research professionals, and patients drawn from a variety of outpatient practice settings. Of the 90 participants, 69 completed the online test and survey questions the day after the session (maximum 36 hours post-session). Among research professionals (n = 14), there was a trend (p = .07) in the direction of iPad subjects testing better on the online test (mean correct = 77%) compared with paper subjects (mean correct = 57%). Among patients (n = 55), iPad subjects had significantly higher test scores than standard paper consent subjects (mean correct = 75% vs 58%, p < .001). For all subjects, the total time spent reviewing the paper consent was 13.2 minutes, significantly less than the average of 22.7 minutes total on the three components to be reviewed using the iPad (introductory video, consent form, interactive quiz). Overall satisfaction and overall enjoyment slightly favored the interactive iPad presentation. This study demonstrates that combining an introductory video, standard consent language, and an interactive quiz on a tablet-based system improves comprehension of research study procedures and risks.
Publisher
Public Library of Science,Public Library of Science (PLoS)
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.