Skip to main content
Log in

Problem areas in the understanding of informed consent for research: study of middle-aged and older patients with psychotic disorders

  • Original Investigation
  • Published:
Psychopharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn LB, Jeste DV (2001) Enhancing informed consent for research and treatment. Neuropsychopharmacology 24:595–607

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman-Rakic PS (1994) Working memory dysfunction in schizophrenia. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 6:348–357

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grisso T, Appelbaum PS (1998) Assessing competence to consent to treatment: a guide for physicians and other health professionals. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard JM, DeMets D, the BHAT Research Group (1981) How informed is consent? The BHAT experience. Controlled Clin Trials 2:287–303

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kay S, Fiszbein A, Opler LA (1987) The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 13:261–276

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

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

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura B. Dunn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-003-1501-3

Keywords

Navigation