Health Literacy Intervention for Informed Consent of Cancer Patients Considering Clinical Trial Participation
NCT ID: NCT01964222
Last Updated: 2015-12-07
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
201 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2014-05-31
2015-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
By random 1:1 assignment, 180 participants will either receive:
\*Targeted, web-based decision aid (DA) about participating in cancer clinical trials.
or
\*Usual care/control-Access to the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials.
Outcomes from the DA group will be compared to outcomes in a usual care/control group.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Decision Aid (DA)
The decision aid (DA) will be provided to patients randomized to the experimental/intervention group.
Decision Aid (DA)
Participants will be shown (on a computer) a targeted, web-based decision aid focused on the topic of clinical trials in addition to usual care.
Control
Participants randomized to the control group will receive usual care and will be shown Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials.
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Decision Aid (DA)
Participants will be shown (on a computer) a targeted, web-based decision aid focused on the topic of clinical trials in addition to usual care.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* English speaking
* At least 18 years old
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Miami
OTHER
Washington University School of Medicine
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Mary C Politi, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Washington University School of Medicine
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Siteman Cancer Center
St Louis, Missouri, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Murthy VH, Krumholz HM, Gross CP. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. JAMA. 2004 Jun 9;291(22):2720-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.22.2720.
Janet Yang Z, McComas K, Gay G, Leonard JP, Dannenberg AJ, Dillon H. From information processing to behavioral intentions: exploring cancer patients' motivations for clinical trial enrollment. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 May;79(2):231-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.08.010. Epub 2009 Sep 11.
Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Assessing the System for Protecting Human Research Participants; Federman DD, Hanna KE, Rodriguez LL, editors. Responsible Research: A Systems Approach to Protecting Research Participants. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2002. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK43563/
Silverman H, Hull SC, Sugarman J. Variability among institutional review boards' decisions within the context of a multicenter trial. Crit Care Med. 2001 Feb;29(2):235-41. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200102000-00002.
McNutt LA, Waltermaurer E, Bednarczyk RA, Carlson BE, Kotval J, McCauley J, Campbell JC, Ford DE. Are We Misjudging How Well Informed Consent Forms are Read? J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2008 Mar;3(1):89-97. doi: 10.1525/jer.2008.3.1.89.
Grossman SA, Piantadosi S, Covahey C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? J Clin Oncol. 1994 Oct;12(10):2211-5. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.10.2211.
Corbie-Smith G, Thomas SB, Williams MV, Moody-Ayers S. Attitudes and beliefs of African Americans toward participation in medical research. J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Sep;14(9):537-46. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.07048.x.
Featherstone K, Donovan JL. Random allocation or allocation at random? Patients' perspectives of participation in a randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 1998 Oct 31;317(7167):1177-80. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7167.1177.
Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary PD, Clark JW, Weeks JC. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet. 2001 Nov 24;358(9295):1772-7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06805-2.
Dresden GM, Levitt MA. Modifying a standard industry clinical trial consent form improves patient information retention as part of the informed consent process. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Mar;8(3):246-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01300.x.
Young DR, Hooker DT, Freeberg FE. Informed consent documents: increasing comprehension by reducing reading level. IRB. 1990 May-Jun;12(3):1-5. No abstract available.
Krumholz HM. Informed consent to promote patient-centered care. JAMA. 2010 Mar 24;303(12):1190-1. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.309. No abstract available.
Coyne CA, Xu R, Raich P, Plomer K, Dignan M, Wenzel LB, Fairclough D, Habermann T, Schnell L, Quella S, Cella D; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Randomized, controlled trial of an easy-to-read informed consent statement for clinical trial participation: a study of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2003 Mar 1;21(5):836-42. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.07.022.
Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, Pramanik S, Divers SG. Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998 May 6;90(9):668-74. doi: 10.1093/jnci/90.9.668.
Flory J, Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review. JAMA. 2004 Oct 6;292(13):1593-601. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.13.1593.
Entwistle V. Supporting participation in clinical research: decision aids for trial recruitment? Health Expect. 2008 Sep;11(3):205-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00519.x. No abstract available.
Brehaut JC, Lott A, Fergusson DA, Shojania KG, Kimmelman J, Saginur R. Can patient decision aids help people make good decisions about participating in clinical trials? A study protocol. Implement Sci. 2008 Jul 23;3:38. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-3-38.
Byrne MM, Tannenbaum SL, Gluck S, Hurley J, Antoni M. Participation in cancer clinical trials: why are patients not participating? Med Decis Making. 2014 Jan;34(1):116-26. doi: 10.1177/0272989X13497264. Epub 2013 Jul 29.
Sutherland HJ, da Cunha R, Lockwood GA, Till JE. What attitudes and beliefs underlie patients' decisions about participating in chemotherapy trials? Med Decis Making. 1998 Jan-Mar;18(1):61-9. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9801800113.
Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP): Compliance Determination Letters. US Department of Health and Human Services. Washington, DC: 2002.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
201309076
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id