Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
M. Jefford, Rosemary Moore (2008)
Improvement of informed consent and the quality of consent documents.The Lancet. Oncology, 9 5
J. Flory, E. Emanuel (2004)
Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review.JAMA, 292 13
E. Emanuel, David Wendler, C. Grady (2000)
What makes clinical research ethical?Australasian Journal of Dermatology, 42
L. Jansen (2005)
A Closer Look at the Bad Deal Trial: Beyond Clinical EquipoiseHastings Center Report, 35
N. Hébert-croteau, J. Brisson, J. Lemaire, J. Latreille (2005)
The benefit of participating to clinical researchBreast Cancer Research and Treatment, 91
S. Moore (2001)
A need to try everything: patient participation in phase I trials.Journal of advanced nursing, 33 6
Beadle Beadle, Yates Yates, Najman Najman, Clavarino Clavarino, Thomson Thomson, Williams Williams, Kenny Kenny, Roberts Roberts, Mason Mason, Schlect Schlect (2004a)
Illusions in advanced cancer: belief in curability, will to live and quality of lifePsycho-Oncology, 13
M. Schaeffer, David Krantz, A. Wichman, H. Masur, E. Reed, J. Vinicky (1996)
The impact of disease severity on the informed consent process in clinical research.The American journal of medicine, 100 3
G. Beadle, P. Yates, J. Najman, A. Clavarino, D. Thomson, Gail Williams, Liz Kenny, S. Roberts, Bernard Mason, David Schlecht (2004)
Illusions in advanced cancer: The effect of belief systems and attitudes on quality of lifePsycho‐Oncology, 13
E. Emanuel (1995)
A phase I trial on the ethics of phase I trials.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 13 5
Geoffrey Beadle, Geoffrey Beadle, Patricia Yates, J. Najman, A. Clavarino, David Thomson, Gail Williams, Lizbeth Kenny, S. Roberts, Bernard Mason, D. Schlect (2004)
Beliefs and practices of patients with advanced cancer: implications for communicationBritish Journal of Cancer, 91
Gillian Nycum, L. Reid (2008)
The Harm-Benefit Tradeoff in “Bad Deal” TrialsKennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 17
M. Mayer (2006)
Listen to all the voices: an advocate's perspective on early access to investigational therapiesClinical Trials, 3
M. Miller (2000)
Phase I cancer trials. A collusion of misunderstanding.The Hastings Center report, 30 4
M. Slevin, L. Stubbs, H. Plant, P. Wilson, W. Gregory, P. Armes, S. Downer (1990)
Attitudes to chemotherapy: comparing views of patients with cancer with those of doctors, nurses, and general public.British Medical Journal, 300
N. Lynøe, M. Sandlund, Gisela Dahlqvist, L. Jacobsson (1991)
Informed consent: study of quality of information given to participants in a clinical trial.British Medical Journal, 303
Y. Baruch, Brooks Holtom (2008)
Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational researchHuman Relations, 61
A. Bois, Justine Rochon, C. Lamparter, J. Pfisterer (2004)
Pattern of care and impact of participation in clinical studies on the outcome in ovarian cancerInternational Journal of Gynecologic Cancer, 15
C. Daugherty, M. Ratain, E. Grochowski, C. Stocking, E. Kodish, R. Mick, M. Siegler (1995)
Perceptions of cancer patients and their physicians involved in phase I trials.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 13 5
P. Appelbaum, L. Roth, C. Lidz, Paul Benson, W. Winslade (1987)
False hopes and best data: consent to research and the therapeutic misconception.The Hastings Center report, 17 2
L. Cronbach (1951)
Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of testsPsychometrika, 16
BEADLE G., MENGERSEN K., MOYNIHAN S. & YATES P. (2011) European Journal of Cancer Care20, 585–592 Perceptions of the ethical conduct of cancer trials by oncology nurses Informed consent and subject protection are internationally mandated requirements for the ethical conduct of research; however, the monitoring of the day‐to‐day conduct of research may be insufficient for ensuring consistent compliance with required ethical ideals. Oncology nurses were surveyed about their perceptions of ethical issues relevant to cancer trials research. Utilising an investigator‐developed instrument, multi‐item scales assessed six ethical domains. Of 192 respondents, 95% or more held definite views in 12 of 15 items about patient understanding of cancer trials, informed consent and the welfare of participants. Approximately 95% perceived that patients consented freely and knew how to withdraw from a trial, and 81% perceived better monitoring of trial than non‐trial patients. However, more than 80% of respondents perceived that at times patients had unrealistic expectations of participation, and more than 50% perceived that participants sometimes did not understand the nature and risk of cancer trials. Although the conative attributes of patients place limits on the goals of bioethics, the results of this study show first that oncology nurses have opinions about ethical constructs directly linked to the daily conduct of cancer clinical trials, and second that this link warrants further investigation in order to benchmark trial conduct against the ideals of ethical research.
European Journal of Cancer Care – Wiley
Published: Sep 1, 2011
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.