1. Informed consent procedure in a double blind randomized anthelminthic trial on Pemba Island, Tanzania: do pamphlet and information session increase caregivers knowledge?
- Author
-
Shaali M. Ame, Ulfat A. Mohammed, Said M. Ali, Marta S. Palmeirim, Jennifer Keiser, Amanda Ross, and Brigit Obrist
- Subjects
Male ,Understanding ,Hookworm ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Health (social science) ,education ,030231 tropical medicine ,Information session ,MEDLINE ,Tanzania ,Hookworm Infections ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Double-Blind Method ,Informed consent ,Surveys and Questionnaires ,Pamphlet ,medicine ,Animals ,Humans ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Session (computer science) ,Child ,lcsh:R723-726 ,Informed Consent ,biology ,Information Dissemination ,Antinematodal Agents ,Health Policy ,biology.organism_classification ,Clinical trial ,Comprehension ,Mebendazole ,Issues, ethics and legal aspects ,Clinical research ,Caregivers ,Philosophy of medicine ,Family medicine ,Female ,Pamphlets ,lcsh:Medical philosophy. Medical ethics ,Psychology ,Research Article - Abstract
BackgroundIn clinical research, obtaining informed consent from participants is an ethical and legal requirement. Conveying the information concerning the study can be done using multiple methods yet this step commonly relies exclusively on the informed consent form alone. While this is legal, it does not ensure the participant’s true comprehension. New effective methods of conveying consent information should be tested. In this study we compared the effect of different methods on the knowledge of caregivers of participants of a clinical trial on Pemba Island, Tanzania.MethodsA total of 254 caregivers were assigned to receive (i) a pamphlet (n = 63), (ii) an oral information session (n = 62) or (iii) a pamphlet and an oral information session (n = 64) about the clinical trial procedures, their rights, benefits and potential risks. Their post-intervention knowledge was assessed using a questionnaire. One group of caregivers had not received any information when they were interviewed (n = 65).ResultsIn contrast to the pamphlet, attending an information session significantly increased caregivers’ knowledge for some of the questions. Most of these questions were either related to the parasite (hookworm) or to the trial design (study procedures).ConclusionsIn conclusion, within our trial on Pemba Island, a pamphlet was found to not be a good form of conveying clinical trial information while an oral information session improved knowledge. Not all caregivers attending an information session responded correctly to all questions; therefore, better forms of communicating information need to be found to achieve a truly informed consent.
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF