Streamlined versus traditional consent for low-risk comparative effectiveness trials: a randomized experimental study to measure patients' and public attitudes

J Comp Eff Res. 2022 Apr;11(5):329-346. doi: 10.2217/cer-2021-0173. Epub 2022 Mar 3.

Abstract

Aim: Streamlining consent for low-risk comparative effectiveness research (CER) could facilitate research, while safeguarding patients' rights. Materials & methods: 2618 adults were randomized to one of seven consent approaches (six streamlined and one traditional) for a hypothetical, low-risk CER study. A survey measured understanding, voluntariness, and feelings of respect. Results: Participants in all arms had a high understanding of the trial and positive attitudes toward the consent interaction. Highest satisfaction was with a streamlined approach showing a video before the medical appointment. Participants in streamlined were more likely to mistakenly think a signature was required. Conclusion: Streamlined consent was no less acceptable than traditional, signed consent. Streamlined and traditional approaches achieved similar levels of understanding, voluntariness and a feeling that the doctor-patient interaction was respectful.

Keywords: comparative effectiveness research; ethics; informed consent; learning health system; streamlined consent.

Publication types

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Attitude
  • Comparative Effectiveness Research*
  • Humans
  • Informed Consent*
  • Public Opinion
  • Surveys and Questionnaires