Informed Consent and Subject Motivation to Participate in a Large, Population-Based Genomics Study: The Marshfield Clinic Personalized Medicine Research Project
Abstract
Background: The objective of this study was to measure subject perspective and reaction to participation in the Personalized Medicine Research Project (PMRP) and to identify factors predicting understanding of the study elements. Method: Self-administered questionnaires were mailed to 1,593 subjects (10% sample). The questionnaire had three sections: section A consisted of 21 factual questions; section B consisted of 14 questions to assess the level of understanding about the PMRP concepts, and section C asked about the purpose of the PMRP. Results: The mean age of the 924 survey respondents was 52 years (SD = 16.9), with a range of 18–95 years. The majority of participants were female (n = 561, 61%). The percent of total correct responses for section A was significantly higher for females compared with males (males: 58.4% and females: 60.4%, t test = –2.18, p = 0.03) and age was significantly inversely related to percent of correct responses (β coefficient = –0.122, p < 0.001). More than one third of the participants indicated that the USD 20 greatly influenced their decision to participate in the project. In a multiple logistic regression model, people living outside of Marshfield were significantly more likely to indicate that the USD 20 greatly influenced their decision to participate (odds ratio = 1.40, 95% confidence limit = 1.06, 1.86) and age was inversely related to the monetary influence on decision to participate (odds ratio = 0.98, 95% confidence limit = 0.97, 0.98). Conclusion: Future community consultation efforts should highlight areas of lower understanding. In addition, research coordinators may need to take more time informing males and older individuals about project details so that they are making truly informed decisions about study participation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many patients generally have limited knowledge about precision medicine, genetic testing, and pharmacogenomics.
“However, as other studies have demonstrated, many patients generally have a limited knowledge about PM [65, 71, 99–102], genetic testing [62, 69, 95] and pharmacogenomics [73, 101] and also express difficulties in understanding [51].”
From Patients’ and professionals’ views related to ethical issues in precision medicine: a mixed research synthesis (2021) · cites this paper as [102]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lessons from HeLa Cells: The Ethics and Policy of Biospecimens
Beskow, L. M. (2016) · Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-083115-022536 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
“Empirical research has amply shown that consent forms are too long and written at too high a grade level (1, 4,19,29, 76, 84, 85, 105, 106, 125) and, not surprisingly, many participants do not understand the information disclosed (4–6,70,71, 83, 87, 97), including biobank participants (93,104,114).”
BackgroundErdmann, A., Rehmann-Sutter, C., & Bozzaro, C. (2021) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-021-00682-8 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Cooke Bailey, J. N., Crawford, D. C., Goldenberg, A., Slaven, A., Pencak, J., Schachere, M., Bush, W. S., Sedor, J. R., & O’Toole, J. F. (2018) · Journal of Personalized Medicine · doi:10.3390/jpm8030021 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- McCarty, C. A., Nair, A., Austin, D. M., & Giampietro, P. F.
- Affiliations
- Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation (US)
- Marshfield Clinic (US)
- Venue
- Public Health Genomics
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2006-12-13
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 2-9
- ISSN
- 1422-2795 (ISSN-L)
- 1662-4246
- 1662-8063
- OpenAlex
- W2067465901
- Cited by
- 87
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 2.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Public Health Genomics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Northwestern University
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical and Health Sciences Research
- Keywords
- informed consent, research participation motivation, financial incentives, community consultation
- MeSH terms
- Female, Humans, Informed Consent, Male, Motivation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Genomics, Research Subjects, Genetic Research, Population Groups
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review