How information is presented in an informed consent form can mean the difference between success and failure in a research project.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments. (1995). Executive Summary and Guide to Final Report (USGPO Stock No. 061–000–0084907). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
2.
AndreA. D.WickensC. D. (1995, October). When users want what's not best for them. Ergonomics in Design, pp. 10–14.
3.
DavisT. C.HolcombeR. F.BerkelH. J.PraminckS.DiversS. G. (1998). Informed consent for clinical trials: A comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. Journal of the American Cancer Institute, 90, 668–674.
4.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1991, June). Protection of human subjects 45 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 46.116 (a) and (b).
5.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General. (1998, June). Institutional review boards: A time for reform (OEI-01–97–00193). Washington, DC: Author.
6.
FadenR. (1995). Protecting human subjects. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A56.
7.
NielsenJ. (1993). Usability engineering. Boston: AP Professional.
8.
NielsenJ.LevyJ. (1994). Measuring usability: Preference versus performance. Communications of the ACM, 17, 67–75.
9.
WogalterM. S.HoweJ. E.SifuentesA. H.LuginbuhlJ. (1999). On the adequacy of legal documents: Factors that influence informed consent. Ergonomics, 42, 593–613.
