Traditional participant information and consent forms (PICFs) tend to be lengthy and complex. The SImPLE trial was developed to evaluate whether a novel consent process that uses plain language and illustrative materials can improve communication of clinical trial information, increase participant comprehension, and enhance the consent experience compared with a standard PICF.
Materials for the study were developed specifically for the ANZadapt (ANZUP2101) prostate cancer clinical trial context; however, enrolment in ANZadapt is not part of this study. The focus is on the information transfer and decision-making experience of adults receiving cancer treatment who may be eligible for clinical trials.
SImPLE is a randomised two-period crossover study. Adults receiving cancer treatment who are potentially eligible for clinical trial participation are enrolled and randomised to one of two sequences: either the standard PICF first followed by the novel consent approach, or the reverse sequence. There is a washout period of at least seven days between the two study periods to minimise carryover effects.
The crossover design allows within-participant comparisons of comprehension and other outcomes between the two consent approaches. Participants complete assessments 24 hours after reviewing each set of consent materials.
The standard comparator is a 17-page NHMRC-style PICF. The novel consent process comprises three components designed to simplify and clarify trial information:
These materials were developed to test whether visual aids and simplified wording improve understanding and the participant experience compared with the traditional, longer PICF format.
Enrolled participants are randomised to the order of consent materials. After reviewing the assigned PICF or novel materials, participants wait 24 hours and then complete a comprehension assessment and a structured interview. After the washout period of at least seven days, participants review the alternate set of materials and repeat the 24-hour assessment and interview.
The primary analysis cohort comprises participants who complete both study periods and their paired assessments, enabling within-subject comparisons.
The primary endpoint is comprehension of clinical trial information. This is measured with a study-specific 22-item questionnaire administered 24 hours after each review. The questionnaire contains 10 true/false items and 12 multiple-choice questions.
Secondary endpoints assess:
All outcome measures are collected after each study period to enable direct comparison between the two consent approaches within the same participant.
The primary analysis will compare comprehension scores between the novel and standard consent approaches using a paired t-test among participants who complete both study periods. This approach uses within-subject differences to assess whether the novel materials produce higher comprehension scores than the standard PICF.
Secondary outcomes relating to acceptability and engagement will be summarised using descriptive statistics and compared between consent approaches as appropriate. The protocol specifies that summary tables and comparative tests will be used where suitable for the outcome type.
No additional numerical thresholds, sample size calculations, or significance levels beyond the planned paired t-test are reported in this statistical analysis plan text.
Sensitivity analyses are planned to assess the robustness of the primary findings and to evaluate the potential impact of crossover design effects. These analyses are intended to test whether conclusions about comprehension differences are consistent under alternative assumptions and analytic approaches relevant to crossover trials.
Details of the exact sensitivity methods and any handling rules for missing data or protocol deviations were not reported in the source statistical analysis plan text.
The authors state that all relevant ethical guidelines were followed. Ethical approval for this work was provided by the Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (approval reference 2025_ETH02197). The authors confirm that necessary participant consent processes and institutional requirements were met and that appropriate forms are archived.
The trial is registered under ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05393791. The preprint notes that the manuscript reports new research that has not been peer reviewed and should not be used to guide clinical practice.
Declared funders include the Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group. A small amount of in-kind funding support was provided by the Integrated Clinical Oncology Network (ICON).
The statistical analysis plan states that no data are associated with this document. Data generated in subsequent trial publications will be made available on reasonable request subject to applicable ethical and governance requirements.
The authors have declared no competing interests in the preprint record.