ライフサイエンスコーパス: consent form

1 obtained and all patients signed an informed consent form.

2 ard-approved protocol and signed an informed consent form.

3 their notification preference on the biopsy consent form.

4 sence of a nurse, and careful reading of the consent form.

5 pproved the study, and all patients signed a consent form.

6 and other issues and to address them in the consent form.

7 etermine the frequency and effect of missing consent forms.

8 pitfalls of specific and separate anesthesia consent forms.

9 enhance subjects' understanding of informed consent forms.

10 inadvertent role in promulgating unreadable consent forms.

11 Reading levels of informed consent forms.

12 s of informed consent were included in their consent forms.

13 approval of scientific protocols and written consent forms.

14 uded in the study after they signed informed consent forms.

15 Of 15 trials of enhanced consent forms, 6 showed significant improvement in under

16 unknown addresses or who did not return the consent form and 163 nonresponders did not participate.

17 Single Alcohol Screening Question [M-SASQ]), consent forms, and a short survey collecting contact det

18 creening, preapproved template protocols and consent forms, and clearer guidance regarding co-enrollm

19 volving human biological materials, existing consent forms, and literature on informed consent to cre

20 % of faculty felt dissatisfied with resident consent forms, and more than two-thirds felt patients we

21 itute consent form template, not signing the consent form at initial discussion, presence of a nurse,

22 viewing and reading about the study and the consent form at the subject's own pace with testing and

23 und that 66% of patients were missing signed consent forms at surgery and that this caused a delay fo

24 Missing consent forms at surgery can lead to delays in patient c

25 In this article, we recommend that (1) donor consent forms be expanded to include consent to research

26 institutional review board-approved informed consent forms before enrollment.

27 ng the approval of the protocol and informed consent forms by the respective IRBs at the University o

28 Three consent forms contained all of the basic elements of inf

29 and nurses were introduced to the universal consent form during orientation to the ICU.

30 Ethicists have suggested that written consent forms encourage participants in phase 1 cancer t

31 sized that text provided by IRBs in informed-consent forms falls short of the IRBs' own readability s

32 After signing a consent form, five patients with at least two comparable

33 A hospital-approved universal consent form for 8 commonly performed procedures (arteri

34 ption of direct benefit as well as risk, all consent forms for 1999 phase 1 cancer trials were compil

35 Consent forms for phase 1 oncology studies almost never

36 udy ultrasound examinations, interviews, and consent forms for review of medical records.

37 Analysis of informed consent forms for the presence and the adequacy of descr

38 g through the use of multimedia and enhanced consent forms have had only limited success.

39 reviewed using the iPad (introductory video, consent form, interactive quiz).

40 In many instances, the missing consent forms interfered with team rounds and resident e

41 At our center, missing consent forms led to delayed cases, burdensome and inade

42 a specific and separate anesthesia informed consent form may be useful, it should not undermine the

43 After signing an informed consent form, men referred for transrectal prostate biop

44 ng indication of laterality on the patient's consent form (n=10), absence of a site mark on the patie

45 eed to address, if relevant, in the informed consent forms of critical care clinical trials.

46 agent as "treatment" or "therapy." Only one consent form promised direct benefit to subjects.

47 Reading levels of the consent forms ranged from grades 8.2 to 13.4 (mean +/- s

48 ent form, type of review performed, types of consent forms required, preparation time, and number of

49 The literature on informed consent forms suggest that shorter informed consent form

50 ome, use of the US National Cancer Institute consent form template, not signing the consent form at i

51 d for IRB readability standards and informed-consent-form templates.

52 IRBs commonly provide text for informed-consent forms that falls short of their own readability

53 Hence, consent forms that satisfy the U.S. federal regulations

54 Centers also provided a copy of all consent forms they generated and IRB correspondence rega

55 Providing a universal consent form to patients, proxies, and health care clini

56 Patients were excluded if their original consent forms to report transplant outcomes were not sig

57 ssion and approval, use/nonuse of a specific consent form, type of review performed, types of consent

58 ntation of the same study and its associated consent form using an iPad device in two populations: cl

59 A questionnaire and consent form were sent to the surviving 132 patients of

60 Study procedures and consent forms were approved by the institutional review

61 Surveys and IRB-approved consent forms were obtained from all of the contacted IR

62 Informed consent forms were read and explained to 49 schizophreni

63 erials and Methods: The study procedures and consent forms were reviewed and approved by each site's

64 consent forms suggest that shorter informed consent forms written at a lower reading level, when rea