Volume 27, Issue 6 e12954
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Identifying essential information to support patient decision-making regarding participation in cancer clinical trials: A Delphi study

Chi-Yin Kao

Corresponding Author

Chi-Yin Kao

Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan

Correspondence

Chi-Yin Kao, Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Sanchia Aranda

Sanchia Aranda

Cancer Council Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Department of Nursing, Melbourne School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author
Mei Krishnasamy

Mei Krishnasamy

Department of Nursing, Melbourne School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author
Bridget Hamilton

Bridget Hamilton

Department of Nursing, Melbourne School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 28 November 2018
Citations: 8

Abstract

Purposes

This research set out to contribute to ongoing efforts to improve the quality of informed consent information provided to patients by specifically focusing on establishing consensus with regard to essential information to enhance the informed consent process.

Design and Methods

A Delphi consensus method was used to conduct three rounds of online surveys. Five groups of experts directly or indirectly involved in the informed consent process were invited to participate: patients, family members/friends, physicians, other health professionals and other key informants, including ethicists, contract research staff and pharmaceutical company staff.

Findings: Of 156 eligible participants, 101 participants (64.7%) completed all three rounds. In round 1, 994 information items were reported and generated into 74 statements. These were grouped under eight headings essential to the informed consent process. In rounds 2 and 3, the list was reduced to 15 statements representing consensus on essential information to be included in a summarised patient information document to support decision-making regarding trial participation. Risks and discomforts, participation requirements and trial governance were identified as important considerations.

Conclusions

The 15 essential statements identified in this study could be used as components of a summarised information sheet given to potential cancer clinical trial participants, as an adjunct to the informed consent process. A robust evaluation of the impact of these statements on the quality of the informed consent process is needed.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.