Abstract
Rationale
Optimizing the abilities of individuals with psychiatric disorders to provide meaningful informed consent for research has become a heightened concern for psychiatric researchers.
Objectives
We examined a post-consent test of comprehension given to older patients with psychotic disorders to identify problem areas in the understanding of informed consent for research.
Methods
One hundred and two middle-aged and older outpatients with schizophrenia or related psychotic disorders and twenty normal comparison subjects were administered a 20-item questionnaire to assess their comprehension of consent for a low-risk research protocol after receiving either a routine (paper-based) or an enhanced (computerized, structured slideshow incorporating greater review) consent procedure. Data on individual questions were analyzed.
Results
Patients had more difficulty than normal comparison subjects on open-ended questions, including those asking about study procedures, time involved, and potential risks and benefits. Among patients, the enhanced procedure was associated with better performance on questions about potential risks and time required than the routine procedure.
Conclusions
Problem areas in the understanding of informed consent, such as study procedures and potential risks and benefits, should be the focus of attempts to improve the consent process for patient participants with severe mental illness. Research also should be done to clarify how best to assess understanding of consent, since the wording of questions likely affects the responses.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Appelbaum PS, Roth LH, Lidz C (1982) The therapeutic misconception: informed consent in psychiatric research. Int J Law Psychiatry 5:319–329
Carpenter WT, Gold JM, Lahti AC, Queern CA, Conley RR, Bartko JJ, Kovnick J, Appelbaum PS (2000) Decisional capacity for informed consent in schizophrenia research. Arch Gen Psychiatry 57:533–538
Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, Pramanik S, Divers SG (1998) Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:668–674
Dunn LB, Jeste DV (2001) Enhancing informed consent for research and treatment. Neuropsychopharmacology 24:595–607
Dunn LB, Lindamer LA, Palmer BW, Schneiderman LJ, Jeste DV (2001) Enhancing comprehension of consent for research in older patients with psychosis: a randomized study of a novel educational strategy. Am J Psychiatry 158:1911–1913
Dunn LB, Lindamer LA, Palmer BW, Golshan S, Schneiderman LJ, Jeste DV (2002) Improving understanding of research consent in middle-aged and elderly patients with psychotic disorders. Am J Geriatric Psychiatry 10:142–150
Goldman-Rakic PS (1994) Working memory dysfunction in schizophrenia. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 6:348–357
Grisso T, Appelbaum PS (1995) The MacArthur Treatment Competence Study. III. Abilities of patients to consent to psychiatric and medical treatments. Law Hum Behav 19:149–174
Grisso T, Appelbaum PS (1998) Assessing competence to consent to treatment: a guide for physicians and other health professionals. Oxford University Press, New York
Howard JM, DeMets D, the BHAT Research Group (1981) How informed is consent? The BHAT experience. Controlled Clin Trials 2:287–303
Kay S, Fiszbein A, Opler LA (1987) The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 13:261–276
National Bioethics Advisory Commission (1998) Research involving persons with mental disorders that may affect decision making capacity, vol 1. Report and recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Rockville, MD
Roberts LW (1998) The ethical basis of psychiatric research: conceptual issues and empirical findings. Compr Psychiatry 39:99–110
Roberts LW, Roberts B (1999) Psychiatric research ethics: an overview of evolving guidelines and current ethical dilemmas in the study of mental illness. Biol Psychiatry 46:1025–1038
Roberts LW, Warner TD, Brody JL, Roberts B, Lauriello J, Lyketsos C (2002) Patient and psychiatrist ratings of hypothetical schizophrenia research protocols: assessment of harm potential and factors influencing participation decisions. Am J Psychiatry 159:573–584
Roth LH, Lidz CW, Meisel A, Soloff PH, Kaufman K, Spiker DG, Foster FG (1982) Competency to decide about treatment or research: an overview of some empirical data. Int J Law Psychiatry 5:29–50
Stiles PG, Poythress NG, Hall A, Falkenbach D, Williams R (2001) Improving understanding of research consent disclosures among persons with mental illness. Psychiatric Serv 52:780–785
Taub H (1986) Comprehension of informed consent for research: issues and directions for future study. IRB: A Review of Human Subjects Research 12:7–10
Wirshing DA, Wirshing WC, Marder SR, Liberman RP, Mintz J (1998) Informed consent: assessment of comprehension. Am J Psychiatry 155:1508–1511
Acknowledgements
This work was supported in part by NIMH grants MH66062, MH43693, MH66248, and MH-59101, by the National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression, and by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dunn, L.B., Jeste, D.V. Problem areas in the understanding of informed consent for research: study of middle-aged and older patients with psychotic disorders. Psychopharmacology 171, 81–85 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-003-1501-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-003-1501-3