Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31823337›Full record

ArticleJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2020

Too Dense and Too Detailed: Evaluation of the Health Literacy Attributes of an Informed Consent Document.

Vanessa W Simonds, Dedra Buchwald

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vanessa W SimondsDepartment of Health and Human Development, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, 59717, USA. vanessa.simonds@montana.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1151-5723
Dedra BuchwaldWashington State University, Pullman, WA, USA.
Montana State University · USWashington State University · US

Funding

Research Education CoreP30AG015292 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI MULLER, CLEMMA JACOBSEN · 1997 to 2022
$12.3M
Training ProgramU54CA153498 · NCI · WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY · PI BUCHWALD, DEDRA S, HENDERSON, JEFFREY A · 2010 to 2015
$4.1M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA153498NIA NIH HHS P30 AG015292
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The US government recently updated the Common Rule, a set of federal regulations to ensure the ethical conduct of human subjects research. The new regulations require that consent documents provide information that is clear and concise enough to enable truly informed consent. This study explores potential American Indian research participants' understanding and perceptions of an example consent document, focusing on possible improvements to better serve the requirements of the revised Common Rule. Participants completed a survey that collected demographic data and measured health literacy, numeracy, and comprehension of the example document. Next, they participated in focus groups to answer open-ended questions regarding their views on the example document. We calculated mean scores and frequencies of response to analyze quantitative survey data and performed a qualitative thematic analysis of focus group transcripts. Results demonstrated that American Indian participants with relatively strong health literacy skills clearly understood key elements of the consent document, including the purpose of signing it, confidentiality, compensation, and whom to contact for questions. However, they were overwhelmed by details on research procedures and were concerned about the document's layout. To make consent documents more readily comprehensible, participants recommended the addition of headings, bullets, graphics, and relevant pictures. They also recommended a two-step consent process, comprising a short introduction to the research project followed by a longer explanation of procedures. These results illustrate the potential advantages of community engagement in drafting consent materials. Health researchers would likely benefit from community recommendations like the ones we elicited as they design consent documents adherent to the revised Common Rule.

Indexed as

American Indian or Alaska NativeAdultAgedAudiovisual AidsComprehensionConsent FormsFemaleFocus GroupsHealth LiteracyHumansMaleMiddle AgedResearch DesignResearch SubjectsSocioeconomic FactorsUnited StatesAmerican IndianHealth disparitiesHealth literacyInformed consent

Identifiers

PMID31823337
PMCPMC7067617
OpenAlexW2996032752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.