Postal recruitment and consent obtainment from index cases of narcolepsy
Tóm tắt
Access to research volunteers may be hampered by low numbers of cases and few eligible participants for rare diseases in clinical settings. We recruited volunteers and obtained informed consent by mail from narcolepsy cases in a case-control study, and here in we report feasibility, response rate, timeliness and cost. We invited index cases into the study by mail through their care-giving physicians then mailed study information and consent forms to cases that indicated interest in the study. Of the 33 index cases invited, 15 (45.0 %) expressed interest in the study, and of those, 14 (93.3 %) returned their signed informed consents by mail. The median number of days from invitation to consent return was 39, interquartile range = 45, and the cost per consent obtained from the recruited subjects was $ 23.61. In this setting, postal recruitment for biomedical research on rare conditions is feasible and time and cost effective.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Berg RM, Moller K, Rossel PJ. An ethical analysis of proxy and waiver of consent in critical care research. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2013;57(4):408–16.
Vollmann J, Winau R. Informed consent in human experimentation before the Nuremberg code. Bmj. 1996;313(7070):1445–9.
O’Neill O. Some limits of informed consent. J Med Ethics. 2003;29(1):4–7.
Nijhawan LP, Janodia MD, Muddukrishna BS, Bhat KM, Bairy KL, Udupa N, et al. Informed consent: Issues and challenges. J Adv Pharm Technol Res. 2013;4(3):134–40.
Roache R. Why is informed consent important? J Med Ethics. 2014;40(7):435–6.
Gillon R. Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to scope. Bmj. 1994;309(6948):184–8.
Ursin LO. Personal autonomy and informed consent. Med Health Care Philos. 2009;12(1):17–24.
Flory J, Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants’ understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review. Jama. 2004;292(13):1593–601.
Nishimura A, Carey J, Erwin PJ, Tilburt JC, Murad MH, McCormick JB. Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials. BMC Med Ethics. 2013;14:28.
Afolabi MO, Bojang K, D’Alessandro U, Imoukhuede EB, Ravinetto RM, Larson HJ, et al. Multimedia Informed Consent Tool for a Low Literacy African Research Population: Development and Pilot-Testing. J Clin Res Bioeth. 2014;5(3):178.
Kripalani S, Bengtzen R, Henderson LE, Jacobson TA. Clinical research in low-literacy populations: using teach-back to assess comprehension of informed consent and privacy information. Irb. 2008;30(2):13–9.
Willison DJ, Keshavjee K, Nair K, Goldsmith C, Holbrook AM. Patients’ consent preferences for research uses of information in electronic medical records: interview and survey data. Bmj. 2003;326(7385):373.
Baker R, Shiels C, Stevenson K, Fraser R, Stone M. What proportion of patients refuse consent to data collection from their records for research purposes? Br J Gen Pract. 2000;50(457):655–6.
Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, DiGuiseppi C, Pratap S, Wentz R, et al. Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. Bmj. 2002;324(7347):1183.
Angus VC, Entwistle VA, Emslie MJ, Walker KA, Andrew JE. The requirement for prior consent to participate on survey response rates: a population-based survey in Grampian. BMC Health Serv Res. 2003;3(1):21.
Raziano DB, Jayadevappa R, Valenzula D, Weiner M, Lavizzo-Mourey R. E-mail versus conventional postal mail survey of geriatric chiefs. Gerontologist. 2001;41(6):799–804.
Stenhammar C, Bokstrom P, Edlund B, Sarkadi A. Using different approaches to conducting postal questionnaires affected response rates and cost-efficiency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(10):1137–43.