medigraphic.com

2012, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Cir Cir 2012; 80 (2)

Readability of education and consent forms in assisted reproduction procedures of the Latin American Network of Assisted Reproduction

Álvarez-Díaz JA

Language: Spanish
References: 45
Page: 162-170
PDF size: 165.40 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Informed consent (IC) is the process where the patient receives information provided by the medical staff to understand key aspects of any intervention to be performed on the patient and for the patient to have the right to allow (or not) that such intervention takes place. To accomplish this objective, health care workers have two groups of tools: those that evaluate the capacity (and competence) of patients and those that facilitate the information and communication process. Among these are clinical interviewing skills, relationship help, emotional support (counseling) and written forms of IC. The IC process is difficult in assisted reproduction due to the quantity and complexity of information on human fertility, developmental biology, and technology applications. The Latin American Network of Assisted Reproduction has had eight "education and consent forms in assisted reproductive proceduresî since 2001. We undertook this study to measure the readability of the formal language "education and consent forms in assisted reproduction procedures" proposed by LANAR with the Flesch index validated in Spanish.
Methods: Eight files were obtained in Microsoft Word format to use tools. The INFLESZ scale was used to assess the formal linguistics readability of each of the eight forms.
Conclusions: The eight forms have a readability of "somewhat difficult," which corresponds to the INFLESZ scale for specialist press and popular science texts, making them difficult to understand for an average reader. Based on this, it should be proposed to amend formal readability.


REFERENCES

  1. Simón Lorda P. El consentimiento informado. Historia, teoría y práctica. Madrid: Triacastela, 2000 p. 352.

  2. Díaz Pintos G. El consentimiento: ¿una garantía de la autonomía moral del paciente o un expediente para eximir de la responsabilidad? Derecho y Salud 1998;6:25-29.

  3. Broggi Trias M. ¿Consentimiento informado o desinformado? El peligro de la medicina defensiva. Med Clin (Barc) 1999;112(3):95-96.

  4. Sánchez Caro J. El consentimiento informado ante el derecho: una nueva cultura. Rev Calid Asist 1999;14:138-144.

  5. Real Academia Española. Diccionario de la lengua Española. Tomo II. 22ª ed. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, 2001 p. 1360.

  6. Alliende González F. La legibilidad de los textos. Santiago de Chile, Andrés Bello, 1994 p. 24.

  7. Blanco Pérez A Gutiérrez Couto U, Casal Acción B. Cómo realizar una comunicación científica. Aspectos tipográficos (III). Revista Electrónica de Terapia Ocupacional Galicia 2005;2:1-15. Disponible en: http://www.revistatog.com/num2/pdfs/num2art7.pdf

  8. Ferrando Belart V. La legibilidad: un factor fundamental para comprender un texto. Aten Primaria 2004;34(3):143-146.

  9. Giles TD, Still B. A syntactic approach to readability. J Tech Writ Comm 2005;35(1):47-70.

  10. Sancho Guinda C. Punctuation as readability and textuality factor in technical discourse. Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos 2002;4:75-94.

  11. Flesch R. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol 1948;32(3):221-233.

  12. Gunning R. The technique of clear writing. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1952 p. 3-45.

  13. Fry E. A readability formula that saves time. J Read 1968;11(7):513- 516,575-578.

  14. McLaughlin GH. SMOG grading a new readability formula. J Read 1969;12:639-646.

  15. Smith EA, Kincaid JP. Derivation and validation of the automated readability index for use with technical materials. Hum Factors 1970;12:457-464.

  16. Kandel L, Moles A. Application de l'Indice de Flesch à la langue français. Cahiers d'Etudes de Radio-Television 1958;19:253-274.

  17. Martins TBF, Ghiraldelo CM, Nunes MGV, Oliveira Junior ON. Readability formulas applied to textbooks in Brazilian Portuguese: ICMC Technical Report N, 1996 p. 11.

  18. Fernández Huerta J. Medidas sencillas de lecturabilidad. Consigna 1959;214:29-32.

  19. Szigriszt Pazos F. Sistemas predictivos de legilibilidad del mensaje escrito: fórmula de perspicuidad [Tesis Doctoral] Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 1993. Disponible en http://eprints.ucm.es/tesis/19911996/S/3/S3019601.pdf

  20. Barrio-Cantalejo IM, Simón-Lorda P, Melguizo M, Escalona I, Marijuán MI, Hernando P. Validación de la Escala INFLESZ para evaluar la legibilidad de los textos dirigidos a pacientes. An Sist Sanit Navar 2008;31(2):135-152.

  21. Red Latinoamericana de Reproducción Asistida. Formularios de educación y consentimiento en procedimientos de reproducción asistida. Santiago de Chile: Red LARA; 2001. Disponible en: http://www.redlara.com/aa_espanhol/publicacoes.asp

  22. Simón Lorda P, Concheiro Carro L. El consentimiento informado: teoría y práctica (II). Med Clin (Barc) 1993;101(5):174-182.

  23. Simón Lorda P, Barrio Cantalejo IM, Concheiro Carro L. Legibilidad de los formularios escritos de consentimiento informado. Med Clin (Barc) 1996;107(14):524-529.

  24. Barrio Cantalejo I, Simón Lorda P. Medición de la legibilidad de textos escritos. Correlación entre método manual de Flesch y métodos informáticos. Aten Primaria 2003;31(2):104-108.

  25. Grundner TM. Two formulas for determining the readability of subject consent forms. Am Psychol 1978;33(8):773-775.

  26. Grundner TM. On the readability of surgical consent forms. N Engl J Med 1980;302(16):900-902.

  27. Baker MT, Taub HA. Readability of informed consent forms for research in a Veterans Administration medical center. JAMA 1983;250(19):2646-2648.

  28. Mariner WK, McArdle PA. Consent forms, readability, and comprehension: the need for new assessment tools. Law Med Health Care 1985;13(2):68-74.

  29. Handelsman MM, Kemper MB, Kesson-Craig P, McLain J, Johnsrud C. Use, content, and readability of written informed consent forms for treatment. Prof Psychol Res Pr 1986;17(6):514-518.

  30. Ogloff JR, Otto RK. Are research participants truly informed? Readability of informed consent forms used in research. Ethics Behav 1991;1(4):239-252.

  31. Rubiera G, Arbizu R, Alzueta A, Agúndez JJ, Riera JR. La legibilidad de los documentos de consentimiento informado en los hospitales de Asturias. Gac Sanit 2004;18(2):153-158.

  32. Gómez Guinovart FJ. Bases lingüísticas y computacionales del procesamiento de la impropiedad estilística y la legibilidad. RESLA 1999; suppl 1:153-174.

  33. da Costa Miranda V, Bezerra de Souza Fêde A, Thaumaturgo Lera A, Ueda A, Veiga Antonangelo D, Brunetti K, et.al. Como consentir sem entender? Rev Assoc Med Bras 2009;55(3):328-334.

  34. Karchmer S. Una aproximación al problema de la reproducción asistida. Qué y cuánto informar al paciente. Acta Médica Grupo Ángeles 2004;2(1):51-54.

  35. Ramos-Ramos A, Morales Fernández A, Valdez-López RM, González-Romero CG. Consentimiento bajo información y reproducción asistida. Revista CONAMED 2008;13(1):29-34.

  36. Fernández A, Castilla JA, Martínez L, Núñez AI, García-Peña ML, Mendoza JL, et. al. Indicadores de calidad asistencial en un programa de FIV/ICSI. Rev Iberoam Fertil Reprod Hum 2002;19(4):249-252.

  37. González E, Castilla JA, Magán R, Ortiz A, Ortiz-Galisteo JR, Aguilar J, et al. Consentimientos informados de reproducción asistida y legibilidad lingüística. Rev Iberoam Fertil Reprod Hum 2004;21(1):69-74.

  38. Red Latino Americana de Reproducción Asistida. Registro Latinoamericano de Reproducción Asistida. Santiago de Chile: Red LARA; 2010. Disponibles en: http://www.redlara.com/imagens/arq/2008_registro%202008.pdf

  39. Paris A, Cracowski JL, Maison P, Radauceanu A, Cornu C, Hommel M. Impact of French 'Comités de Protection des Personnes' on the readability of informed consent documents (ICD) in biomedical research: more information, but not better information. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2005;19(3):395-399.

  40. Knapp P, Raynor DK, Silcock J, Parkinson B. Performance-based readability testing of participant information for a Phase 3 IVF trial. Trials. 2009 Sep 1;10:79. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-10-79.

  41. Ancker J. Developing the informed consent form: a review of the readability literature and an experiment. AMWA Journal 2004;19(4):97-100.

  42. Ridpath JR, Greene SM, Wiese CJ. PRISM Readability Toolkit. 3rd ed. Seattle: Group Health Center for Health Studies, 2007. p. 11-17.

  43. Marijuan M, Lejona B, López de Heredia J, Arcelay A, Martínez S, Hernanz M, et al. Guía práctica para la elaboración de documentos de información y consentimiento. Derio: Osakidetza–Servicio vasco de salud. Disponible en: http://ocw.ehu.es/ciencias-de-la-salud/bioetica/mcomplem/guia_cast.pdf

  44. Paris A, Nogueira da Gama Chaves D, Cornu C, Maison P, Salvat- Mélis M, Ribuot C, et al. Improvement of the comprehension of written information given to healthy volunteers in biomedical research: a single-blind randomized controlled study. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2007;21(2):207-214.

  45. Paasche-Orlow MK, Taylor HA, Brancati FL. Readability standards for informed-consent forms as compared with actual readability. N Engl J Med 2003;348(8):721-726.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com