Skip Navigation


Annals of Oncology Advance Access originally published online on October 15, 2008
Annals of Oncology 2009 20(2):379-385; doi:10.1093/annonc/mdn623
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/2/379    most recent
mdn623v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in Ann Oncol
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Berger, O.
Right arrow Articles by Loge, J. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Berger, O.
Right arrow Articles by Loge, J. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

clinical trials

The length of consent documents in oncological trials is doubled in twenty years

O. Berger1,*, B. H. Grønberg1,3, K. Sand1, S. Kaasa1 and J. H. Loge1,2

1 Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, St Olavs Hospital, Trondheim
2 National Resource Centre for Studies of Long-term Effects after Cancer, Rikshospitalet University Hospital, Oslo
3 Department of Oncology, St Olavs Hospital (Trondheim University Hospital), Trondheim, Norway

* Correspondence to: Mr. O. Berger, Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, St Olavs Hospital, N-7005 Trondheim, Norway. Tel: +4797519419 Fax: +4773867289; E-mail: olabe{at}stud.ntnu.no

Background: The aim of the study was to investigate whether the length of informed consent documents (ICDs) for oncological trials have increased from 1987 to 2007 and analyze the content of the ICDs.

Design: In total, 87 ICDs from oncological trials approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (REC) in the central region of Norway from 1987 to 2007 were analyzed. A list of 17 basic (fundamental medical and ethical aspects) and 30 formal (juridical aspects, financing, insurance and storage of data) content components was constructed based upon international and REC guidelines for ICDs. The number of words and presence of components were registered for all ICDs.

Results: The mean length of the ICDs increased from 338 (range 276–464) words in 1987–1990 to 1087 words (range 399–2345) in 2005–2007. The number of components increased from nine to 25 during the same period. Basic components increased steadily from seven in 1987–1989 to 14 in 2005–2007 while the components concerning formalities increased substantially from two to 11.

Conclusions: The increased length of the ICDs is explained by an increased complexity of the documents and especially more information about formalities. This development increasingly demands competent readers and might prohibit truly informed consents.

Key words: cancer, clinical trial, content, informed consent, length

Received for publication May 26, 2008. Accepted for publication August 6, 2008.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in Ann Oncol:

in this issue

Ann Oncol 2009 20: 195. [Extract] [Full Text]  





Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.