Recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?

CONTEXT: Researchers and investigators have argued that getting fully informed written consent may not be possible in the developing countries where illiteracy is widespread. AIMS: To determine the percentage of patients who agree to participate in a trial after receiving either complete or partial...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gitanjali B, Raveendran R, Pandian D, Sujindra S
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2003-01-01
Series:Journal of Postgraduate Medicine
Online Access:http://www.jpgmonline.com/article.asp?issn=0022-3859;year=2003;volume=49;issue=2;spage=109;epage=13;aulast=Gitanjali
id doaj-0cb95f43a64f42a492714462fe562f42
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0cb95f43a64f42a492714462fe562f422020-11-24T23:10:28ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Postgraduate Medicine0022-38590972-28232003-01-0149210913Recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?Gitanjali BRaveendran RPandian DSujindra SCONTEXT: Researchers and investigators have argued that getting fully informed written consent may not be possible in the developing countries where illiteracy is widespread. AIMS: To determine the percentage of patients who agree to participate in a trial after receiving either complete or partial information regarding a trial and to find out whether there were gender or educational status-related differences. To assess reasons for consenting or refusing and their depth of understanding of informed consent. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A simulated clinical trial in two tertiary health care facilities on in-patients. METHODS AND MATERIAL: An informed consent form for a mock clinical trial of a drug was prepared. The detailed / partial procedure was explained to a purposive sample of selected in-patients and their consent was asked for. Patients were asked to free list the reasons for giving or withholding consent. Their depth of understanding was assessed using a questionnaire. Chi-square test was used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The percentages of those consenting after full disclosure 29/102 (30%) and after partial disclosure 15/50 (30%) were the same. There was a significant (p=0.043) gender difference with a lesser percentage of females (30%) consenting to participation in a trial. Educational status did not alter this percentage. Most patients withheld consent because they did not want to give blood or take a new drug. Understanding of informed consent was poor in those who consented. CONCLUSIONS: The fact that only one-third of subjects are likely to give consent to participate in a trial needs to be considered while planning clinical trials with a large sample size. Gender but not educational status influences the number of subjects consenting for a study. Poor understanding of the elements of informed consent in patients necessitates evolving better methods of implementing consent procedures in India.http://www.jpgmonline.com/article.asp?issn=0022-3859;year=2003;volume=49;issue=2;spage=109;epage=13;aulast=Gitanjali
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gitanjali B
Raveendran R
Pandian D
Sujindra S
spellingShingle Gitanjali B
Raveendran R
Pandian D
Sujindra S
Recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?
Journal of Postgraduate Medicine
author_facet Gitanjali B
Raveendran R
Pandian D
Sujindra S
author_sort Gitanjali B
title Recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?
title_short Recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?
title_full Recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?
title_fullStr Recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?
title_full_unstemmed Recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?
title_sort recruitment of subjects for clinical trials after informed consent: does gender and educational status make a difference?
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
series Journal of Postgraduate Medicine
issn 0022-3859
0972-2823
publishDate 2003-01-01
description CONTEXT: Researchers and investigators have argued that getting fully informed written consent may not be possible in the developing countries where illiteracy is widespread. AIMS: To determine the percentage of patients who agree to participate in a trial after receiving either complete or partial information regarding a trial and to find out whether there were gender or educational status-related differences. To assess reasons for consenting or refusing and their depth of understanding of informed consent. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A simulated clinical trial in two tertiary health care facilities on in-patients. METHODS AND MATERIAL: An informed consent form for a mock clinical trial of a drug was prepared. The detailed / partial procedure was explained to a purposive sample of selected in-patients and their consent was asked for. Patients were asked to free list the reasons for giving or withholding consent. Their depth of understanding was assessed using a questionnaire. Chi-square test was used for statistical analyses. RESULTS: The percentages of those consenting after full disclosure 29/102 (30%) and after partial disclosure 15/50 (30%) were the same. There was a significant (p=0.043) gender difference with a lesser percentage of females (30%) consenting to participation in a trial. Educational status did not alter this percentage. Most patients withheld consent because they did not want to give blood or take a new drug. Understanding of informed consent was poor in those who consented. CONCLUSIONS: The fact that only one-third of subjects are likely to give consent to participate in a trial needs to be considered while planning clinical trials with a large sample size. Gender but not educational status influences the number of subjects consenting for a study. Poor understanding of the elements of informed consent in patients necessitates evolving better methods of implementing consent procedures in India.
url http://www.jpgmonline.com/article.asp?issn=0022-3859;year=2003;volume=49;issue=2;spage=109;epage=13;aulast=Gitanjali
work_keys_str_mv AT gitanjalib recruitmentofsubjectsforclinicaltrialsafterinformedconsentdoesgenderandeducationalstatusmakeadifference
AT raveendranr recruitmentofsubjectsforclinicaltrialsafterinformedconsentdoesgenderandeducationalstatusmakeadifference
AT pandiand recruitmentofsubjectsforclinicaltrialsafterinformedconsentdoesgenderandeducationalstatusmakeadifference
AT sujindras recruitmentofsubjectsforclinicaltrialsafterinformedconsentdoesgenderandeducationalstatusmakeadifference
_version_ 1725607164042543104