Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36178713›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2022

Optimized Informed Consent for Psychotherapy: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Leonie Gerke, Sönke Ladwig, Franz Pauls, Manuel Trachsel, Martin Härter, Yvonne Nestoriuc

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

6 authors.

Leonie GerkeClinical Psychology, Helmut-Schmidt-University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4767-1349
Sönke LadwigClinical Psychology, Helmut-Schmidt-University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9640-7558
Franz PaulsClinical Psychology, Helmut-Schmidt-University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6483-3456
Manuel TrachselInstitute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2697-3631
Martin HärterDepartment of Medical Psychology and Institute of Psychotherapy, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7443-9890
Yvonne NestoriucClinical Psychology, Helmut-Schmidt-University/University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2191-0495

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInformed consent is a legal and ethical prerequisite for psychotherapy. However, in clinical practice, consistent strategies to obtain informed consent are scarce. Inconsistencies exist regarding the overall validity of informed consent for psychotherapy as well as the disclosure of potential mechanisms and negative effects, the latter posing a moral dilemma between patient autonomy and nonmaleficence.

objectiveThis protocol describes a randomized controlled web-based trial aiming to investigate the efficacy of a one-session optimized informed consent consultation.

methodsThe optimized informed consent consultation was developed to provide information on the setting, efficacy, mechanisms, and negative effects via expectation management and shared decision-making techniques. A total of 122 participants with an indication for psychotherapy will be recruited. Participants will take part in a baseline assessment, including a structured clinical interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-fifth edition (DSM-5) disorders. Eligible participants will be randomly assigned either to a control group receiving an information brochure about psychotherapy as treatment as usual (n=61) or to an intervention group receiving treatment as usual and the optimized informed consent consultation (n=61). Potential treatment effects will be measured after the treatment via interview and patient self-report and at 2 weeks and 3 months follow-up via web-based questionnaires. Treatment expectation is the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include the capacity to consent, decisional conflict, autonomous treatment motivation, adherence intention, and side-effect expectations.

resultsThis trial received a positive ethics vote by the local ethics committee of the Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University-Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany on April 1, 2021, and was prospectively registered on June 17, 2021. The first participant was enrolled in the study on August 5, 2021. We expect to complete data collection in December 2022. After data analysis within the first quarter of 2023, the results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals in summer 2023.

conclusionsIf effective, the optimized informed consent consultation might not only constitute an innovative clinical tool to meet the ethical and legal obligations of informed consent but also strengthen the contributing factors of psychotherapy outcome, while minimizing nocebo effects and fostering shared decision-making.

trial registrationPsychArchives; http://dx.doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4929. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/39843.

Indexed as

adverse effectconsentcounselingdecision-makingethicsexpectation managementmental healthnocebonocebo effectpsychiatrypsychotherapyriskrisks and side effects of psychotherapyshared decision-makingside effect

Identifiers

PMID36178713
PMCPMC9568815

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.