Comparison of Audiovisual and Paper-Based Materials for 1-Time Informed Consent for Research in Prison: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Stéphanie Baggio, Laurent Gétaz, Lauriane Giraudier, Lilian Tirode, Marta Urrutxi, Sonia Carboni, Aurore Britan, Robbie l'Anson Price, Hans Wolff, Patrick Heller, Stéphanie Baggio, Laurent Gétaz, Lauriane Giraudier, Lilian Tirode, Marta Urrutxi, Sonia Carboni, Aurore Britan, Robbie l'Anson Price, Hans Wolff, Patrick Heller

Abstract

Importance: Few studies are available on informed consent (IC) among detained persons, even with ethics being a critical aspect of prison research. In IC research, audiovisual material seems to improve understanding and satisfaction compared with conventional paper-based material, but findings remain unclear.

Objective: To compare audiovisual and paper-based materials for 1-time general IC for research in prisons.

Design, setting, and participants: This cross-sectional randomized clinical trial was conducted in 2 corrections facilities in Switzerland (an adult prison and a juvenile detention center). The study was conducted from December 14, 2019, to December 2, 2020, in the adult prison and from January 15, 2020, to September 9, 2021, in the juvenile detention center. In the adult prison, study participation was offered to detained persons visiting the medical unit (response rate, 84.7%). In the juvenile detention center, all newly incarcerated adolescents were invited to participate (response rate, 98.0%).

Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive paper-based conventional material or to watch a 4-minute video. Materials included the same legal information, as required by the Swiss Federal Act on Research Involving Human Beings.

Main outcomes and measures: The main outcome was acceptance to sign the IC form. Secondary outcomes included understanding, evaluation, and time to read or watch the IC material.

Results: The study included 190 adults (mean [SD] age, 35.0 [11.8] years; 190 [100%] male) and 100 adolescents (mean [SD] age, 16.0 [1.1] years; 83 [83.0%] male). In the adult prison, no significant differences were found between groups in acceptance to sign the IC form (77 [81.1%] for paper-based material and 81 [85.3%] for audiovisual material; P = .39) and to evaluate it (mean [SD] correct responses, 5.09 [1.13] for paper-based material and 5.01 [1.07] for audiovisual material; P = .81). Understanding was significantly higher in the audiovisual material group (mean [SD] correct responses, 5.09 [1.84]) compared with the paper-based material group (mean [SD] correct responses, 4.61 [1.70]; P = .04). In the juvenile detention center, individuals in the audiovisual material group were more likely to sign the IC form (44 [89.8%]) than the paper-based material group (35 [68.6%], P = .006). No significant difference was found between groups for understanding and evaluation. Adults took a mean (SD) of 5 (2) minutes to read the paper material, and adolescents took 7 (3) minutes.

Conclusions and relevance: Given the small benefit of audiovisual material, these findings suggest that giving detained adults and prison health care staff a choice regarding IC material is best. For adolescents, audiovisual material should be provided. Future studies should focus on increasing understanding of the IC process.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05505058.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

References

    1. Tran NT, Baggio S, Dawson A, et al. . Words matter: a call for humanizing and respectful language to describe people who experience incarceration. BMC Int Health Hum Rights. 2018;18(1):41. doi:10.1186/s12914-018-0180-4
    1. Fazel S, Baillargeon J. The health of prisoners. Lancet. 2011;377(9769):956-965. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61053-7
    1. Fazel S, Hayes AJ, Bartellas K, Clerici M, Trestman R. Mental health of prisoners: prevalence, adverse outcomes, and interventions. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016;3(9):871-881. doi:10.1016/S2215-0366(16)30142-0
    1. Ahalt C, Sudore R, Bolano M, Metzger L, Darby AM, Williams B. “Teach-to-goal” to better assess informed consent comprehension among incarcerated clinical research participants. AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(9):862-872. doi:10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.9.peer3-1709
    1. Ferguson WJ, Cloud D, Spaulding AC, et al. . A call to action: a blueprint for academic health sciences in the era of mass incarceration. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2016;27(2A):5-17. doi:10.1353/hpu.2016.0051
    1. Christopher PP, Garcia-Sampson LG, Stein M, Johnson J, Rich J, Lidz C. Enrolling in clinical research while incarcerated: what influences participants’ decisions? Hastings Cent Rep. 2017;47(2):21-29. doi:10.1002/hast.686
    1. Charles A, Rid A, Davies H, Draper H. Prisoners as research participants: current practice and attitudes in the UK. J Med Ethics. 2016;42(4):246-252. doi:10.1136/medethics-2012-101059
    1. Pont J. Ethics in research involving prisoners. Int J Prison Health. 2008;4(4):184-197. doi:10.1080/17449200802473107
    1. van Westendorp M. Walk the line [masterpaper]. University of Leuven. 2017. Accessed September 3, 2022.
    1. Moser DJ, Arndt S, Kanz JE, et al. . Coercion and informed consent in research involving prisoners. Compr Psychiatry. 2004;45(1):1-9. doi:10.1016/j.comppsych.2003.09.009
    1. Falagas ME, Korbila IP, Giannopoulou KP, Kondilis BK, Peppas G. Informed consent: how much and what do patients understand? Am J Surg. 2009;198(3):420-435. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.02.010
    1. Koonrungsesomboon N, Laothavorn J, Karbwang J. Understanding of essential elements required in informed consent form among researchers and institutional review board members. Trop Med Health. 2015;43(2):117-122. doi:10.2149/tmh.2014-36
    1. Farrell EH, Whistance RN, Phillips K, et al. . Systematic review and meta-analysis of audio-visual information aids for informed consent for invasive healthcare procedures in clinical practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2014;94(1):20-32. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2013.08.019
    1. Gesualdo F, Daverio M, Palazzani L, et al. . Digital tools in the informed consent process: a systematic review. BMC Med Ethics. 2021;22(1):18. doi:10.1186/s12910-021-00585-8
    1. Synnot A, Ryan R, Prictor M, Fetherstonhaugh D, Parker B. Audio-visual presentation of information for informed consent for participation in clinical trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(5):CD003717. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003717.pub3
    1. World Medical Association . World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191-2194. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053
    1. Wendler D. One-time general consent for research on biological samples. BMJ. 2006;332(7540):544-547. doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7540.544
    1. Robbie I’Anson Price webpage. Accessed September 3, 2022.
    1. Chew LD, Griffin JM, Partin MR, et al. . Validation of screening questions for limited health literacy in a large VA outpatient population. J Gen Intern Med. 2008;23(5):561-566. doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0520-5
    1. Lachin JM. Statistical properties of randomization in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1988;9(4):289-311. doi:10.1016/0197-2456(88)90045-1
    1. Kelsey JL, Whittemore AS, Evans AS, Thompson WD. Methods in Observational Epidemiology. 2nd ed. Monographs in Epidemiology and Biostatistics. Oxford University Press; 1996:444.
    1. Wang B, Susukida R, Mojtabai R, Amin-Esmaeili M, Rosenblum M. Model-robust inference for clinical trials that improve precision by stratified randomization and covariate adjustment. J Am Stat Assoc. 2021;0(0):1-12. doi:10.1080/01621459.2021.1981338
    1. Twenge JM, Martin GN, Spitzberg BH. Trends in U.S. adolescents’ media use, 1976–2016: the rise of digital media, the decline of TV, and the (near) demise of print. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. 2019;8(4):329-345. doi:10.1037/ppm0000203
    1. Calderon Y, Cowan E, Nickerson J, et al. . Educational effectiveness of an HIV pretest video for adolescents: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatrics. 2011;127(5):911-916. doi:10.1542/peds.2010-1443

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera