CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT00104559Updated Sep 26, 2008

Computer-Generated Vs. Standard Informed Consent for HIV Research Studies

An interventional study of iMIC-generated consent form and tutorial and Standard paper consent form in HIV Infections, sponsored by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). Status unknown at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2008-09-26.

Sponsored by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) · Not applicable and Interventional

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Sep 2008), so the status shown — last known as Active, not recruiting — may be out of date.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
40
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to test an interactive multimedia informed consent (iMIC) computer program to see if the program can generate a consent form that potential participants in an HIV trial can understand. This study will also determine if these participants prefer the computer-generated consent form and associated interactive tools to a standard consent form written by researchers.

Study hypothesis: 1) Participants who receive information about clinical trials from iMIC Consent Tutorials will answer more questions about the trial correctly than participants who receive information about clinical trials from standard paper consent forms. 2) Participants will rate the iMIC Consent Tutorials as having better usability and user satisfaction than standard paper consent forms.

Read the detailed description

Researchers conducting clinical trials have a legal and ethical obligation to provide participants key information about the trial so that they may either decline participation or grant their informed consent to participate in the study. However, information provided to prospective clinical trial participants is often complex and confusing; often, language used in informed consent is written far above participants' reading level. This study will evaluate the usefulness of a consent form authoring system that helps researchers write comprehensive and understandable consent forms; the authoring system produces both paper consent forms and interactive computer tutorials that are designed to teach potential volunteers about the research study they are considering. This study will compare iMIC-generated consent forms and computer tutorials with standard consent forms for two mock HIV studies: a vaccine trial (VT) and an antiretroviral drug trial (AT).

The iMIC software provides researchers a computer-based authoring environment for producing easier-to-understand informed consent documents. iMIC assists researchers by helping them focus on clearly defining consent issues and content goals, including regulatory, legal, and ethical guidelines to be followed. Through tests for readability and other feedback, iMIC ensures that all the content requirements of good informed consent are met. iMIC generates a paper consent form and an interactive multimedia computer tutorial to help volunteers learn about the clinical trial. The paper consent document can be stand alone or used in conjunction with the generated computer tutorial.

Each participant will receive two consent interventions: one computer-based tutorial and one standard paper consent form. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of four groups. Group 1 will receive the computer-based tutorial for VT and then the standard paper consent form for AT. Group 2 will receive the standard paper consent form for VT and then the computer-based tutorial for AT. Group 3 will receive the computer-based tutorial for AT and then the standard paper consent form for VT. Group 4 will receive the standard paper consent form for AT and then the computer-based tutorial for VT.

At the start of the session, participants will be asked demographic questions and will receive the first consent intervention. When they have completed the intervention, they will be asked 15 questions about the key elements of the clinical trial they have just learned about, as well as an additional series of usability and satisfaction questions about the consent intervention. Next, they will receive the second consent intervention that will teach them about the second clinical trial. Again, they will be asked knowledge and usability and satisfaction questions. After completing the second consent intervention, participants will be asked to compare and answer questions about the two methods of receiving information about clinical trials.

02

Conditions studied

  • HIV Infections

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • HIV
  • Informed Consent
03

In context

HIV Infections

4,257 studies on the registry are indexed under HIV Infections; 240 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 40 is below the median of 83 across 3,250 interventional studies indexed under HIV Infections.

Browse HIV Infections studies →

Lead sponsor

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) is the lead sponsor of 2,401 studies on the registry; 179 are open to participants now.

Of its 396 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 294 (74%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • HIV-infected OR at risk for HIV infection
  • Able to read English at the 5th grade level
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
40 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    1

    Participants will receive the computer-based tutorial for VT and then the standard paper consent form for AT

    Behavioral: iMIC-generated consent form and tutorial · Behavioral: Standard paper consent form

  • Experimental
    2

    Participants will receive the standard paper consent form for VT and then the computer-based tutorial for AT

    Behavioral: iMIC-generated consent form and tutorial · Behavioral: Standard paper consent form

  • Experimental
    3

    Participants will receive the computer-based tutorial for AT and then the standard paper consent form for VT

    Behavioral: iMIC-generated consent form and tutorial · Behavioral: Standard paper consent form

  • Experimental
    4

    Participants will receive the standard paper consent form for AT and then the computer-based tutorial for VT

    Behavioral: iMIC-generated consent form and tutorial · Behavioral: Standard paper consent form

Interventions

  • BehavioraliMIC-generated consent form and tutorial

    Computer-based consent form and tutorial

  • BehavioralStandard paper consent form

    Standard paper consent form

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Clinical trial knowledge acquisition

    Time frame: Throughout study

  2. Consent form usability

    Time frame: Throughout study

  3. Volunteer satisfaction

    Time frame: Throughout study

07

Study locations

1 site
  • The Circumplex Company
    Seattle, Washington 98125, United States
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 26, 2008, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00104559
Lead sponsor
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
First posted
Mar 2, 2005
Start date
Jan 2005
Primary completion
Jul 2007 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 2009 (estimated)
Last update
Sep 26, 2008

Study contacts

Brian D. Raffety, PhD
principal investigator · The Circumplex Company
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Sep 2008. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion