Readability of informed consent documents and its impact on consent refusal rate.

Introduction: Informed consent documents (ICDs) are integral to a research project and must provide all required information to the participant. We undertook a 6-year retrospective cross-sectional analysis of ICDs to assess the same. Methods: We accessed 300 ICDs from studies submitted to institutional ethics committee. Studies were selected using random proportional-to-size sampling across years and study types (thesis, pharma, government, investigator initiated [OA] studies). We used the Flesch–Kincaid Reading Ease Score (FRES), estimated reading time (ERT) and scored ICDs out of 13 points on the basis of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)-mandated headings (ICD Quality Score [IQS]). Information pertaining to the consent refusal rate (CRR) of each study was correlated with FRES, ERT, and other parameters. P <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Two hundred and ninety-three ICDs had complete information. Median FRES was 48.3 (interquartile range [IQR] = 7), median ERT was 4.5 min (IQR = 1.3), the median expected duration of participation was 35 min (IQR = 40); compensation was provided by 23 projects and median compensation was Rs. 2500 (IQR = Rs. 4750). Mean IQS improved from 11.95 to 12.60 in 6 years (Kruskal–Wallis test, P < 0.001). FRES was weakly negatively correlated to the CRR (r = −0.120, P = 0.039), while the expected duration of participation was weakly positively correlated (r = 0.144, P = 0.014). Conclusion: Pharma studies performed better and ICDs have improved in their readability and ICMR guidelines compliance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Perspectives in Clinical Research is the property of Wolters Kluwer India Pvt Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)