Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/56174
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNut Koonrungsesomboonen_US
dc.contributor.authorSupanimit Teekachunhateanen_US
dc.contributor.authorNutthiya Hanprasertpongen_US
dc.contributor.authorJunjira Laothavornen_US
dc.contributor.authorKesara Na-Bangchangen_US
dc.contributor.authorJuntra Karbwangen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-05T03:10:05Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-05T03:10:05Z-
dc.date.issued2016-04-01en_US
dc.identifier.issn14321041en_US
dc.identifier.issn00316970en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84951914677en_US
dc.identifier.other10.1007/s00228-015-2000-2en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84951914677&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/56174-
dc.description.abstract© 2015 The Author(s). Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the principles and informed consent form (ICF) template proposed by the Strategic Initiative for Developing Capacity in Ethical Review (SIDCER) in a clinical pharmacokinetic study by comparing the volunteers' understanding of the enhanced ICF (developed based on the SIDCER methodology) and the conventional ICF (which was previously approved by local Ethics Committee and used in the clinical study). Methods: A total of 550 volunteers were randomly assigned to read either the enhanced ICF or the conventional ICF (1:1) in a mock informed consent approach and subsequently performed the post-test questionnaire. The primary endpoint was the proportion of the participants who had the post-test score of ≥80 %; the secondary endpoints were the total score of the post-test, the score of the categorized ICF elements, and time spent for participation. Results: The proportion of the participants in the enhanced ICF group who achieved the primary endpoint was significantly higher than the conventional ICF group (82.2 % vs. 60.4 %, p < 0.001). The participants in the enhanced ICF group obtained higher scores and spent less time in reading the given ICF and answering the post-test than those in the conventional ICF group (total score 19/21 vs. 18/21, p < 0.001; time spent 20 min vs. 25 min, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The enhanced ICF improved the understanding of the participants in this study. This demonstrates the applicability of the SIDCER ICF principles and its template in the development of an enhanced ICF for improving the quality of ICFs and subjects' understanding in clinical research. Trial registration: TCTR20140727001en_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.subjectPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceuticsen_US
dc.titleImproved participants' understanding in a healthy volunteer study using the SIDCER informed consent form: A randomized-controlled studyen_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleEuropean Journal of Clinical Pharmacologyen_US
article.volume72en_US
article.stream.affiliationsNagasaki Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsThammasat Universityen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.