Co-designing and pilot-testing an infographic to support the consent process in an adaptive platform trial for adults in ICU with community-acquired pneumonia or COVID-19: a mixed methods study within a trial (SWAT)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Informed consent documents educate patients and families about research participation and alternatives. However, given their length and complexity, consent documents can be challenging to understand, particularly in high-stress environments such as the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and for complex study designs such as platform trials. This is an exploratory sequential mixed methods study-within-a-trial (SWAT) of REMAP-CAP (Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia). Phase 1: We conducted focus groups with individuals with lived experience, including ICU survivors, substitute decision makers (SDMs) and research coordinators (RCs) to refine an infographic to augment a priori REMAP-CAP consent encounters. We analyzed data using inductive content analysis. Phase 2: We piloted the infographic with patients/SDMs approached a priori to participate in REMAP-CAP, who could communicate in English, at five sites in Ontario, Canada. We assessed implementation according to 1) eligible consent encounters (number of patients/SDMs eligible for SWAT / approached for REMAP-CAP), 2) receipt of infographic (number of patients/SDMs who received the infographic / eligible consent encounters), 3) consent to participation in this SWAT by patients/SDMs (number of patients/SDMs who consented / those approached), and 4) feedback questionnaire completion (number of patients/SDMs who completed the questionnaire / those who received it). Phase 1: We conducted two, two-hour focus groups with 5 participants (10 participants total). Participants identified important infographic design considerations (visual presentation, language) and content (study details, participation in research). Integration: Results from Phase 1 were used to develop a final consent infographic. Phase 2: Sixty-three patients were eligible for REMAP-CAP during the study period; 21 were eligible (33%) for the SWAT. Of these, 18 patients/SDMs (86%) received the infographic, 17 consented to the SWAT (94%) and 15 (88%) completed questionnaires. RCs completed case report forms for each consent encounter (n = 18, 100%). We engaged individuals with lived experience to co-design a consent infographic. We achieved three of four pre-specified feasibility objectives during pilot testing of the infographic for a priori REMAP-CAP consent encounters. Although there were fewer eligible consent encounters than anticipated, we identified acceptable rates of infographic delivery, consent to SWAT participation and questionnaire completion. Trial Registration: The Northern Ireland Hub for Trials Methodology Research SWAT Repository (SWAT #176). Informed consent documents educate patients and families about research participation. However, given their increasing length and complexity, consent documents can be challenging to understand, particularly in high-stress environments such as the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Patient/Family Partners (PFP) identified that consent documents for REMAP-CAP are challenging to understand. REMAP-CAP is a trial which studies treatments for patients admitted to the ICU with pneumonia or COVID-19. PFP wanted to support communication between research staff and patients/families during the consent process. The objective of our project was to develop and determine the feasibility of using an infographic, consisting of words and images, to supplement consent documents for REMAP-CAP. We planned to develop the infographic using input from patients, family members and research coordinators during focus groups. We also planned to use the infographic during real consent discussions for REMAP-CAP and to collect feedback from patients and family members who received the infographic, and research coordinators who used the infographic. We successfully developed an infographic for use at five hospitals in Ontario, Canada. We did not have as many opportunities to use the infographic as we expected. However, when we did, it was feasible to use the infographic and to collect feedback from patients, families and research coordinators. Findings from our study can be used to inform the design of similar tools for other trials and to inform a future study to understand if the infographic can improve the consent process for patients, families and research coordinators.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,140 | 0,180 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».