Video consent is preferred over written informed consent in pediatric rheumatology research

TL;DR

Video consent is as effective as written consent for pediatric research and is strongly preferred by caregivers and children.

Contribution

Demonstrates that video consent is preferred and equally effective for informed consent in pediatric rheumatology research.

Findings

Video consent and written consent had comparable comprehension and satisfaction levels.

Video consent was strongly preferred despite taking 48 seconds longer than written consent.

Participants found video consent easier to follow.

Abstract

The goal of this study was to determine the difference in participant understanding, satisfaction, timing and, preference between video consent and written informed consent in a pediatric rheumatology research setting. Participants were randomized to receive either video consent or written informed consent for a registry study. After completing the first consent method, they completed a comprehension and satisfaction questionnaire. Then they received the alternate consent method and completed a second set of questionnaires. Bayesian non-parametric tests determined the difference in comprehension, satisfaction, timing and preference between video consent and written informed consent. Ninety-nine caregivers and 76 patients were randomized into video consent (n = 88) and written informed consent (n = 87) groups. Comprehension (Max = 12) and satisfaction (Max = 5) were high in both groups. There was moderate evidence supporting no difference in comprehension (medianvideo consent = 11 and medianwritten informed consent = 10) and satisfaction (medianvideo consent = 4 and medianwritten informed consent = 5) between video consent and written informed consent (BF10 = 0.225 and 0.32, respectively). The median time to complete video consent and written informed consent was 408 (95% Credible Interval (CrI): 397–412) and 360 (95% CrI: 329–391) seconds, respectively. There was decisive evidence that video consent increased the time of consent (in our sample by 48 seconds) compared to written informed consent (BF10 = 713). There was decisive evidence for participants preferring video consent over written informed consent (BF10 = 2.307x1011) as they thought it was easier to follow. Overall, participant understanding and satisfaction were comparable between video consent and written informed consent. Even though video consent was slightly less time efficient compared to written informed consent, video consent was highly preferred by caregivers and patients, supporting its use to obtain informed consent.

The most important part of enrolling someone in a research study is obtaining their informed consent. This means the person freely chooses to join the study after learning about its procedures, risks and benefits. Written informed consent is the most common way for obtaining informed consent. Usually, a person reads through a paper consent form and has a verbal discussion with a researcher. However, this method may be hard for children with varying reading abilities and comprehension skills. An alternative way is to use video consent. This method is where a person watches a video about the research study and then has a verbal discussion with a researcher. In this study video consent was compared to written informed consent for enrolling children and caregivers in a research study. Both methods had similar levels of participant understanding of the study. Also, both processes provided equally satisfying consent experience. While video consent took slightly longer, (48 seconds) compared to written informed consent, it was strongly preferred by caregivers and children. This suggests that video consent is a practical and effective alternative to written informed consent, especially when working with younger participants.

Figures