We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Framing and personalizing informed consent to prevent negative expectations: An experimental pilot study.
Health Psychology : Official Journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association 2015 October
OBJECTIVE: Informing patients about medical treatments and their possible side effects is ethically and legally obligatory but may trigger negative expectations and nocebo-related side effects. This pilot study aims to investigate the effect of different informed consent procedures on treatment expectations for adjuvant breast cancer treatments (Study 1: endocrine therapy; Study 2: chemotherapy).
METHOD: Using an experimental 2-factorial design, healthy women were informed about endocrine therapy (n = 60) or chemotherapy (n = 64) within a hypothetical scenario. Information was framed with or without treatment benefit information and delivered in a personalized or standardized interaction. Primary outcomes were necessity-concern beliefs about the treatment and side-effect expectations, secondary outcomes were decisional conflicts.
RESULTS: In Study 1, side-effect expectations (η²p= .08) and decisional conflicts (η²p = .07) were lower when framed treatment information was given. Providing personalized information resulted in more functional necessity-concern beliefs (η²p = .06) and lower decisional conflicts (η²p = .07). Personalizing and framing of information resulted in more functional necessity-concern beliefs (η²p = .10) and lower decisional conflicts. In Study 2, necessity-concern beliefs were more functional with framing (η²p = .06). Participants in the personalized groups reported lower decisional conflicts (η²p = .06). No differences in side-effect expectations were revealed.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to provide evidence for optimized treatment expectations through altered informed consent strategies. The results emphasize that framing and personalizing informed consent can positively influence treatment expectations and reduce decisional conflicts. However, generalizations are impaired by the study's pilot character. The potential to prevent nocebo responses in clinical practice should be analyzed. (PsycINFO Database Record
METHOD: Using an experimental 2-factorial design, healthy women were informed about endocrine therapy (n = 60) or chemotherapy (n = 64) within a hypothetical scenario. Information was framed with or without treatment benefit information and delivered in a personalized or standardized interaction. Primary outcomes were necessity-concern beliefs about the treatment and side-effect expectations, secondary outcomes were decisional conflicts.
RESULTS: In Study 1, side-effect expectations (η²p= .08) and decisional conflicts (η²p = .07) were lower when framed treatment information was given. Providing personalized information resulted in more functional necessity-concern beliefs (η²p = .06) and lower decisional conflicts (η²p = .07). Personalizing and framing of information resulted in more functional necessity-concern beliefs (η²p = .10) and lower decisional conflicts. In Study 2, necessity-concern beliefs were more functional with framing (η²p = .06). Participants in the personalized groups reported lower decisional conflicts (η²p = .06). No differences in side-effect expectations were revealed.
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to provide evidence for optimized treatment expectations through altered informed consent strategies. The results emphasize that framing and personalizing informed consent can positively influence treatment expectations and reduce decisional conflicts. However, generalizations are impaired by the study's pilot character. The potential to prevent nocebo responses in clinical practice should be analyzed. (PsycINFO Database Record
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app