4.5 Article

Parental comprehension and satisfaction in informed consent in paediatric clinical trials: a prospective study on childhood leukaemia

期刊

ARCHIVES OF DISEASE IN CHILDHOOD
卷 95, 期 10, 页码 800-804

出版社

B M J PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/adc.2009.180695

关键词

-

资金

  1. Contrat d'Initiation a la Recherche Clinique (Assistance Publique Hopitaux de Paris)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To evaluate the extent to which parents are satisfied with and understand the information they are given when their consent is sought for their child to participate in a phase III randomised clinical trial and the reasons for their decision. Patients and method The authors carried out a prospective study. The authors included all parents whose consent was sought for their child to participate in the FRALLE 2000A protocol (acute lymphoblastic leukaemia) at two centres. The parents were questioned twice by a qualified psychologist using a semidirected interview, 1 and 6 months after consent was sought. Results 43 first interviews were carried out. All the parents declared they were satisfied with the explanations provided by the physician. 35 (81%) parents felt that the information provided with the request for consent was appropriate. Eight (19%) parents did not realise that their child had been included in a research protocol. 16 (39%) parents did not understand the concept of randomisation. Half the parents could explain neither the aim of the clinical trial nor the potential benefit of inclusion to their child. Only one third of the parents were aware that they had an alternative. The principal factor underlying their decision, as stated by 29 parents (67%), was confidence in the medical team. Conclusions The parents signed consent forms without having fully understood all the elements specific to the experimental protocol. Rather, the parents based their decision on their confidence in the medical team, even when their child's life was at risk.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据