Skip to content

The Effect of Electronic Informed Consent Information (EICI) on Residual Newborn Specimen Research

The Effect of Electronic Informed Consent Information (EICI) on Residual Newborn Specimen Research

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03141307
Acronym
EICI
Enrollment
711
Registered
2017-05-05
Start date
2018-03-01
Completion date
2018-06-15
Last updated
2019-10-01

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Neonatal Screening

Keywords

Neonatal screening, Biobank, Broad Consent

Brief summary

Obtaining adequate informed consent from potential research participants is a significant challenge for biobank-dependent research. To maintain public trust and support, it is important to establish an informed decision-making process for the collection and use of biospecimens collected within clinical settings. For the majority of all infants born in the US, residual dried blood biospecimens are generated after newborn screening is completed. Some programs choose to store these specimens for several uses including biomedical research. Identifying ways to improve comprehension about broad consent for future biobank-dependent research is a national priority. Specific Aim 1: Identify the key information items necessary to make an informed decision about broad consent for the retention and future research use of residual biospecimens. Methods include focus groups with new parents to determine key information elements relevant to consent for use of residual biospecimens within the Michigan BioTrust. Additional meetings with IRB personnel within the participating hospitals, health departments and universities will also be conducted to ascertain their expectations and requirements for the consent process. Specific Aim 2: Based on the data collected in Aim 1, create a state-of-the-art electronic informed consent information (EICI) tool for use in the clinical setting about the retention and use of residual biospecimens. The award-winning Genetic Science Learning Center will develop the professional EICI in Spanish and English. Validation of the EICI will be completed using feedback from both community and scientific advisory boards for the Michigan BioTrust. Specific Aim 3: Evaluate the EICI consent approach by comparing it to: a) traditional consent delivered on an electronic tablet; and b) the current paper-based consent approach. Both Spanish and English speaking parents (n = 630) in the state of Michigan, where informed consent is required for biobank research during postpartum clinical care, will be recruited and randomized to one of three groups. Specific Aim 4: Assess feasibility of the EICI through focus groups and interviews with birthing hospitals and Department of Community Health staff before and after the intervention. * Hypothesis 1) Women in the Interactive technology group (Group A) and the video group (Group B) will demonstrate higher knowledge at Time 1 and Time 2 about the consent elements and the BioTrust than those who do not receive either EICI tool (Group C). * Hypothesis 2) Women in the EICI groups (Groups A and B) will demonstrate lower decisional conflict at Time 1 and Time 2 toward biobanking than those who do not receive the EICI (Group C). * Hypothesis 3) Women in the EICI groups (Groups A and B) will not differ significantly in their choices about biobanking and attitudes toward NBS and biobank research compared to participants who do not receive EICI tool (Group C).

Detailed description

For the intervention, a research assistant (RA) at each hospital, with permission of the healthcare professional, will ask potential participants if they are interested in participating in this study. If they are interested, the RAs will seek verbal consent for this study at this time. The RA will inform patients that when a healthcare provider comes into their room about the BioTrust, they will have the study information for them. Then the RAs at the labor and deliver units of the hospitals will give an iPad to the healthcare providers seeking consent for the BioTrust. The healthcare providers will be blind to the study group assignment until they enter the patient's room. When a healthcare professional enters a patients' room, she will touch the iPad to see the study group assignment. Participants will be randomized to one of three study groups and this will be programmed automatically on the iPad. If they are in Group A or B, the healthcare providers will give the iPad to the patients to watch or read the consent information. If they are in Group C (control group) the standard brochure will be given about the BioTrust. Immediately following their decision, all participants will complete a brief knowledge survey on the iPad. This recruitment approach mirrors the current clinical encounter for the BioTrust. This current approach is as follows. After newborn screening is completed, a healthcare professional approaches the mother in the hospital and provides them with the Michigan BioTrust brochure (see appendix) and then asks for the mother to consent to allow or not allow their infants' residual DBS to be stored in the Michigan BioTrust. This consent form is a simply check for yes and no with their signature and is attached to the back of the newborn screening card. For this study, after they receive the information in any of the study groups, all participants will still be required to sign this same consent form because it is attached to the physical sample of the newborn screening blood specimens. All participating women will complete a survey 1) immediately following the intervention/control on the electronic table (Time 1) and 2) also will be surveyed by telephone 2-4 weeks follow up (Time 2). Drs. Rothwell, Johnson and Tarini will provide guidance for the coordination of the clinical sites, due to their extensive experience. To ensure success there will be at least weekly communication between the sites and the Project Director, Dr. Johnson and monthly among the site personnel. Drs. Botkin, Rothwell and Johnson will visit each site prior to implementation of data collection to introduce the project and discuss issues sites may have. Once the RAs have been hired at each site they will provide weekly reports of activities and recruitment to the Research team in Utah. Monthly a teleconference will be held and the Site PI's will report on activities and recruitment to the Utah research team and the other site PI. Consistency among the sites will be monitored with these reports and communication strategies. Research team coordination with communication and meetings is based on the successful accomplishment of previous research project (R01 HD058854).

Interventions

BEHAVIORALEICI Movie

The purpose of this intervention is to improve comprehension about broad consent for future biobank-dependent research by watching a brief video.

BEHAVIORALEICI App

The purpose of this intervention is to improve comprehension about broad consent for future biobank-dependent research by exploring an educational app.

BEHAVIORALControl

Standard of care, paper-based brochure

Sponsors

Michigan Department of Health and Human Services
CollaboratorOTHER
Case Western Reserve University
CollaboratorOTHER
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)
CollaboratorNIH
University of Utah
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* adult (\> 18 years) * English-speaking * Recently given birth and are already being approached for participation in the Michigan BioTrust. * Partner of woman who has recently given birth and is already being approached for participation in the Michigan BioTrust

Exclusion criteria

* Newborn baby is in the NICU * Unable to speak English

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Comprehension for Biobanking at Time of ConsentAdministered immediately after the interventionQuestions based on the 16-item biobank checklist developed from consensus-based guidelines for adequate comprehension for biobanking (see Beskow et al. 2014). This measure assesses a person's understanding of the Michigan BioTrust program. Scale range: 0-1 The reported scale is derived from the number of correct answers divided by 20 for a percentage correct. Thus, a score of .6 indicates a 60% correct response rate. Higher values indicate more comprehension of the presented information. Lower values indicate less comprehension of the presented information.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Quality of Informed ConsentAdministered immediately after the interventionThe Quality of Informed Consent assesses how well the participant self-reports their understanding different aspects of the study he/she consented into (Joffe et al., 2001). Scores range from 1 to 5 with higher scores indicating better self-reported understanding of the elements of consent. The scale is created by taking the mean of 14 items.
Attitudes SurveyAdministered at the 2-4 week follow-upAssesses support of the Michigan BioTrust program. This is a single item assessment. Full scale range is 1 to 4. Higher values indicate more support of the Michigan BioTrust. The scale is a likert scale: 1 = Not supportive at all, 4 = Very supportive
Residual Comprehension for BiobankingAdministered at the 2-4 week follow-upThis is a repetition of the Comprehension for Biobanking survey assessed immediately after the intervention. The residual Comprehension for Biobanking survey assesses a person's retention of knowledge of the Michigan BioTrust program two to 4 weeks after the intervention. Scale range: 0-1 The reported scale is derived from the number of correct answers divided by 20 for a percentage correct. Thus, a score of .6 indicates a 60% correct response rate. Higher values indicate more comprehension of the presented information. Lower values indicate less comprehension of the presented information.
Residual Quality of Informed ConsentAdministered at the 2-4 week follow-upAssessment of how well the participant understood different aspects of the study after a gap in time. The Residual Quality of Informed Consent is a repetition of the Quality of Informed Consent measure, now provided 2-4 weeks after the intervention. This measure assesses how well the participant self-reports their understanding different aspects of the study he/she consented into (Joffe et al., 2001). Scores range from 1 to 5 with higher scores indicating better self-reported understanding of the elements of consent. The scale is created by taking the mean of 14 items.
Residual Decisional RegretAdministered at the 2-4 week follow-upThe Residual Decisional Regret measure assesses a person's feelings of regret after making a decision (in this specific case, participation in the Michigan BioTrust). Scores range from 1 to 5 with lower values indicating better outcomes due to less regret. The scale is created by taking the mean of 5 items.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Intervention
The EICI intervention group will receive an electronic interactive tool with movie clips and external links available through the tool. The movie intervention group will watch the educational consent movie and receive the standard paper-based brochure. EICI Movie: The purpose of this intervention is to improve comprehension about broad consent for future biobank-dependent research by watching a brief video. EICI App: The purpose of this intervention is to improve comprehension about broad consent for future biobank-dependent research by exploring an educational app.
471
Control
This group will receive the standard of care currently used (paper-based brochure) Control: Standard of care, paper-based brochure
240
Total711

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Follow-UpLost to Follow-up9754
In-HospitalProtocol Violation40
In-HospitalWithdrawal by Subject02

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicInterventionTotalControl
Age, Continuous29.78 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.92
30.03 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.86
30.53 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.76
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
25 Participants35 Participants10 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
433 Participants658 Participants225 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
13 Participants18 Participants5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
2 Participants3 Participants1 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
17 Participants29 Participants12 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
48 Participants71 Participants23 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
14 Participants21 Participants7 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
2 Participants2 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
26 Participants39 Participants13 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
362 Participants546 Participants184 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
471 participants711 participants240 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
432 Participants660 Participants228 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
39 Participants51 Participants12 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 4710 / 240
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 4710 / 240
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 4710 / 240

Outcome results

Primary

Comprehension for Biobanking at Time of Consent

Questions based on the 16-item biobank checklist developed from consensus-based guidelines for adequate comprehension for biobanking (see Beskow et al. 2014). This measure assesses a person's understanding of the Michigan BioTrust program. Scale range: 0-1 The reported scale is derived from the number of correct answers divided by 20 for a percentage correct. Thus, a score of .6 indicates a 60% correct response rate. Higher values indicate more comprehension of the presented information. Lower values indicate less comprehension of the presented information.

Time frame: Administered immediately after the intervention

Population: The analysis population differs from the number of participants enrolled because the initial 15 to 20 participants at each hospital were considered to be run-in participants during which the protocol was evaluated for its effectiveness at that site and adjusted as needed. Our analysis plan was written to exclude these run-in participants.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
InterventionComprehension for Biobanking at Time of Consent.699 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.133
ControlComprehension for Biobanking at Time of Consent.645 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.172
p-value: <0.001t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Attitudes Survey

Assesses support of the Michigan BioTrust program. This is a single item assessment. Full scale range is 1 to 4. Higher values indicate more support of the Michigan BioTrust. The scale is a likert scale: 1 = Not supportive at all, 4 = Very supportive

Time frame: Administered at the 2-4 week follow-up

Population: The number of participants analyzed does not match the numbers in the participant flow due to missing data at the question level. Participants were not required to answer every single question on the survey.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
InterventionAttitudes Survey3.62 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.626
ControlAttitudes Survey3.57 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.662
p-value: =0.502t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Quality of Informed Consent

The Quality of Informed Consent assesses how well the participant self-reports their understanding different aspects of the study he/she consented into (Joffe et al., 2001). Scores range from 1 to 5 with higher scores indicating better self-reported understanding of the elements of consent. The scale is created by taking the mean of 14 items.

Time frame: Administered immediately after the intervention

Population: The analysis population differs from the number of participants enrolled because the initial 15 to 20 participants at each hospital were considered to be run-in participants during which the protocol was evaluated for its effectiveness at that site and adjusted as needed. Our analysis plan was written to exclude these run-in participants.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
InterventionQuality of Informed Consent4.23 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.692
ControlQuality of Informed Consent4.06 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
p-value: <0.05t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Residual Comprehension for Biobanking

This is a repetition of the Comprehension for Biobanking survey assessed immediately after the intervention. The residual Comprehension for Biobanking survey assesses a person's retention of knowledge of the Michigan BioTrust program two to 4 weeks after the intervention. Scale range: 0-1 The reported scale is derived from the number of correct answers divided by 20 for a percentage correct. Thus, a score of .6 indicates a 60% correct response rate. Higher values indicate more comprehension of the presented information. Lower values indicate less comprehension of the presented information.

Time frame: Administered at the 2-4 week follow-up

Population: The number of participants analyzed does not match the numbers in the participant flow due to missing data at the question level. Participants were not required to answer every single question on the survey.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
InterventionResidual Comprehension for Biobanking.693 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.153
ControlResidual Comprehension for Biobanking.667 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.159
p-value: =0.071t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Residual Decisional Regret

The Residual Decisional Regret measure assesses a person's feelings of regret after making a decision (in this specific case, participation in the Michigan BioTrust). Scores range from 1 to 5 with lower values indicating better outcomes due to less regret. The scale is created by taking the mean of 5 items.

Time frame: Administered at the 2-4 week follow-up

Population: The number of participants analyzed does not match the numbers in the participant flow due to missing data at the question level. Participants were not required to answer every single question on the survey.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
InterventionResidual Decisional Regret1.74 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.866
ControlResidual Decisional Regret1.60 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.623
p-value: <0.05t-test, 2 sided
Secondary

Residual Quality of Informed Consent

Assessment of how well the participant understood different aspects of the study after a gap in time. The Residual Quality of Informed Consent is a repetition of the Quality of Informed Consent measure, now provided 2-4 weeks after the intervention. This measure assesses how well the participant self-reports their understanding different aspects of the study he/she consented into (Joffe et al., 2001). Scores range from 1 to 5 with higher scores indicating better self-reported understanding of the elements of consent. The scale is created by taking the mean of 14 items.

Time frame: Administered at the 2-4 week follow-up

Population: The number of participants analyzed does not match the numbers in the participant flow due to missing data at the question level. Participants were not required to answer every single question on the survey.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
InterventionResidual Quality of Informed Consent4.14 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.779
ControlResidual Quality of Informed Consent4.03 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.763
p-value: =0.124t-test, 2 sided

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026