Medical researchers' knowledge and attitudes toward electronic informed consent in clinical research

Obtaining informed consent from research participants is an ethical and legal obligation for medical researchers in clinical studies. Electronic informed consent (eIC) is increasingly being adopted in clinical research worldwide. However, there is limited data on Chinese medical researchers' knowledge and attitudes toward eIC. This study aims to investigate their knowledge, attitudes, and influencing factors regarding eIC use in clinical research.

This cross-sectional study was conducted using stratified random sampling. From June to August 2022, medical researchers from 8 tertiary hospitals were surveyed via an online platform (Wenjuanxing). A self-developed eIC knowledge questionnaire and attitude scale were used to assess participants' understanding and perceptions of eIC. Univariate analysis was employed to explore factors influencing attitude scores and the correlation between knowledge and attitudes. A generalized linear model was used to analyze associations between demographic characteristics and attitude scores, including the frequency of difficulties in using smartphones or computers, preferred device for using eIC, and their interaction effects. Stratified analysis was further performed for significant interactions.

A total of 399 valid questionnaires were collected. The mean accuracy rate on the eIC knowledge questionnaire was (94.88±15.50)%. Of the respondents, 74.9% had heard of eIC, and 84.5% preferred using mobile devices over computers to access eIC. The median attitude score was 3.41 (3.18, 3.76), indicating generally positive attitudes. Specifically, 81.7% found eIC more convenient than paper-based consent, 79.7% considered it more efficient, and 51.1% believed it could fully replace paper forms. However, 60.7% expressed concerns about data security and privacy, and 89.7% believed that relevant laws and regulations need improvement. Spearman correlation analysis showed a weak positive correlation between knowledge and attitude scores (r=0.171, P=0.001). Univariate analysis indicated that the frequency of difficulty using devices and preferred device for eIC were significantly associated with attitude scores (P<0.05). After adjusting for confounding factors, the generalized linear model demonstrated that participants who occasionally experienced had difficulty using devices had significantly lower attitude scores compared to those who never had difficulty (β=-0.040, 95% CI -0.071 to -0.009, P=0.012). Those who preferred using PCs had significantly lower attitude scores than those who preferred mobile devices (β=-0.066, 95% CI -0.108 to -0.023, P=0.002). Interaction analysis showed a significant interaction analysis showed a significant interaction between age and preferred device (P=0.011), particularly among participants aged ≥45-year (P<0.001). No other interactions were found to be significant (all P>0.05).

Medical researchers in China generally have a high level of knowledge and positive attitudes toward eIC, though concerns remain regarding data security and privacy. Future promotion of eIC in Chinese clinical research should be grounded in ethical considerations and address the specific needs of older users and mobile device users, while also enhancing researchers' competencies in using digital tools and eIC systems.