Assessment of the appropriateness of the i-CONSENT guidelines recommendations for improving understanding of the informed consent process in clinical studies

• Published in: BMC medical ethics Vol. 22; no. 1; pp. 1 - 138
• Main Authors: Fons-Martinez, Jaime, Ferrer-Albero, Cristina, Diez-Domingo, Javier
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BioMed Central Ltd 13.10.2021; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Agreements; Bioethics; Clinical trials; Decision making; Ethical aspects; Ethical guidelines; Ethical recommendations; i-CONSENT; Informed consent; Informed consent (Medical law); Informed consent process; Medical ethics; Patients; Pharmaceutical industry; RAND/UCLA method; Spain
• ISSN: 1472-6939; 1472-6939
• DOI: 10.1186/s12910-021-00708-1

The H2020 i-CONSENT project has developed a set of guidelines that offer ethical recommendations and practical tools aimed at making the informed consent process in clinical studies more comprehensive, tailored, and inclusive. An analysis of the appropriateness of some of its novel recommendations was carried out by a group of experts representing different stakeholders. An adaptation of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used to assess the level of agreement on the recommendations among 14 representatives of different stakeholders, including patients, regulators, investigators, ethics experts, and the pharmaceutical industry. The process included two rounds of rating and a virtual meeting. Fifty-three recommendations were evaluated. After the first round, 34 recommendations were judged "appropriate"; 19 were judged "uncertain"; and none was judged "inappropriate". After the second round, 9 "uncertains" changed to "appropriate". All recommendations rated medians of 6.5-9 on a 1-9 scale (1 = "extremely inappropriate", 5 = "uncertain", 9 = "extremely appropriate"). The sections "General recommendations" and "Gender perspective during the consent process for clinical studies" showed the highest "uncertainty" rating. The four keys to improving the understanding of the ICP in clinical studies are to: (1) consider consent a two-way continuous interaction that begins at the first contact with the potential participant and continues until the end of the study; (2) improve investigators' communication skills; (3) co-create the information; and (4) use a layered approach, including information to compensate for the potential participant's possible lack of health literacy and a glossary of terms. The RAND/UCLA method has demonstrated validity for assessing the appropriateness of recommendations in ethical guidelines. The recommendations of the i-CONSENT guidelines were mostly judged "appropriate" by all stakeholders involved in the informed consent process.