An international core outcome set for evaluating interventions to improve informed consent to clinical trials: The ELICIT Study

被引:8
作者
Gillies, Katie [1 ]
Williamson, Paula R. [2 ]
Entwistle, Vikki A. [1 ]
Gardner, Heidi [1 ]
Treweek, Shaun [1 ]
Campbell, Marion K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Aberdeen, Hlth Serv Res Unit, Hlth Sci Bldg,Foresterhill, Aberdeen AB25 2ZB, Scotland
[2] Univ Liverpool, Shelleys Cottage, Dept Biostat, Brownlow St, Liverpool L69 3GS, Merseyside, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
informed consent; decision making; clinical trials; core outcome sets; methodology; research waste; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.020
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To develop a core outcome set for the evaluation of interventions that aim to improve how people make decisions about whether to participate in randomized controlled trials (of healthcare interventions), the ELICIT Study. Study Design: International mixed-method study involving a systematic review of existing outcomes, semi-structured interviews, an online Delphi survey, and a face-to-face consensus meeting. Results: The literature review and stakeholder interviews (n = 25) initially identified 1045 reported outcomes that were grouped into 40 individually distinct outcomes. These 40 outcomes were scored for importance in two rounds of an online Delphi survey (n = 79), with 18 people attending the consensus meeting. Consensus was reached on 12 core outcomes: therapeutic misconception; comfort with decision; authenticity of decision; communication about the trial; empowerment; sense of altruism; equipoise; knowledge; salience of questions; understanding, how helpful the process was for decision making; and trial attrition. Conclusion: The ELICIT core outcome set is the first internationally agreed minimum set of outcomes deemed essential to be measured in all future studies evaluating interventions to improve decisions about participating in an randomized controlled trial. Use of the ELICIT core set will ensure that results from these trials are comparable and relevant to all stakeholders. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:14 / 22
页数:9
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2000, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2008, WMA declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects
[3]  
[Anonymous], ANAL QUALITATIVE DAT
[4]   Therapeutic misconception in research subjects: Development and validation of a measure [J].
Appelbaum, Paul S. ;
Anatchkova, Milena ;
Albert, Karen ;
Dunn, Laura B. ;
Lidz, Charles W. .
CLINICAL TRIALS, 2012, 9 (06) :748-761
[5]  
Bekker H, 1999, Health Technol Assess, V3, P1
[6]   Three nested randomized controlled trials of peer-only or multiple stakeholder group feedback within Delphi surveys during core outcome and information set development [J].
Brookes, Sara T. ;
Macefield, Rhiannon C. ;
Williamson, Paula R. ;
McNair, Angus G. ;
Potter, Shelley ;
Blencowe, Natalie S. ;
Strong, Sean ;
Blazeby, Jane M. .
TRIALS, 2016, 17
[7]   The adequacy of consent forms for informing patients entering oncological clinical trials [J].
Buchanan, L ;
Laidlaw, C ;
Poulton, G .
ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 1995, 6 (09) :867-870
[8]   Duty, desire or indifference? A qualitative study of patient decisions about recruitment to an epilepsy treatment trial [J].
Canvin, Krysia ;
Jacoby, Ann .
TRIALS, 2006, 7 (1)
[9]  
COMET Initiative, DelphiManager
[10]   Delphi procedure in core outcome set development: rating scale and consensus criteria determined outcome selection [J].
De Meyer, Dorien ;
Kottner, Jan ;
Beele, Hilde ;
Schmitt, Jochen ;
Lange, Toni ;
Van Hecke, Ann ;
Verhaeghe, Sofie ;
Beeckman, Dimitri .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2019, 111 :23-31