The informed consent procedure in epidemiological research

After a brief introduction on the beginning and subsequent developments of informed consent (IC), this paper analyses its ethical, legal, medical and scientific implications and its specific applications to epidemiological research. The aim is to highlight how IC principles should be fulfilled through different procedures responding to the ethical and scientific requirements of epidemiological research. At least two improper applications, in fact, can deprive IC of its meaning: referring to ethical principles without discernment, or following IC guidelines without critical evaluation. Attempts to improve IC procedures adapting them to specific needs and scientific developments should be evaluated carefully and without preconceptions.     

Beyond informed consent

Although a relatively recent phenomenon, the role of informed consent in human research is central to its ethical regulation and conduct. However, guidelines often recommend procedures for obtaining informed consent (usually written consent) that are difficult to implement in developing countries. This paper reviews the guidelines for obtaining informed consent and also discusses prevailing views on current controversies, ambiguities and problems with these guidelines and suggests potential solutions. The emphasis in most externally sponsored research projects in developing countries is on laborious documentation of several mechanical aspects of the research process rather than on assuring true comprehension and voluntary participation. The onus for the oversight of this process is often left to overworked and ill-equipped local ethics review committees. Current guidelines and processes for obtaining informed consent should be reviewed with the specific aim of developing culturally appropriate methods of sharing information about the research project and obtaining and documenting consent that is truly informed. Further research is needed to examine the validity and user friendliness of innovations in information sharing procedures for obtaining consent in different cultural settings.     

医疗技术人体试验中受试者的知情同意权

自纽伦堡大审判以来,医疗技术人体试验中取得受试者的知情同意已经成为人体试验的首要原则.受试者知情同意权包括知情权和同意权.对缺陷告知而实质上影响到受试者的选择权或未经受试者同意实施的试验行为,不管在人体试验中试验者是否尽到注意义务,由此试验行为造成的损害均由试验者承担.     

临床医学科研中的知情同意之我见

结合临床医学科研伦理管理中的经验,对知情同意的要素、知情同意的方式、知情同意的主体、知情告知的主要内容、知情告知的过程、知情同意书的签署、知情同意书的保存等方面进行了探讨,提出了一些见解、体会和经验,供广大医学科学研究工作者和医学科研管理人员参考.     

Record linkage research and informed consent: who consents?

Background  

Linking computerized health insurance records with routinely collected survey data is becoming increasingly popular in health services research. However, if consent is not universal, the requirement of written informed consent may introduce a number of research biases. The participants of a national health survey in Taiwan were asked to have their questionnaire results linked to their national health insurance records. This study compares those who consented with those who refused.     

Ethics of medical scientific research: informed consent and the therapeutic misconception

--Ethical approval of research involving human beings is based on two pillars: supervision of the scientific merit of the research and the risks and burdens for participants by an institutional review board (IRB) or the Dutch Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO), and obtaining informed consent from the participant or his or her legal guardian. --Discussions on the ethical acceptability of a study generally focus on the first pillar, assessment by an IRB. The second pillar, obtaining informed consent, is often neglected. --Some ethical concepts play a role in obtaining informed consent, especially the concept of the 'therapeutic misconception', i.e. that participating in a study is the same as receiving individualised treatment from a physician. --Of importantance in this matter is the fundamental difference between the research relationship (between investigator and participant) and treatment relationship (between physician and patient). --Understanding the concept of therapeutic misconception is essential to explaining why it is often difficult to obtain valid informed consent from patients for medical research.     

No prior informed consent required for 'no-risk' scientific research

Recent research has shown that prior informed consent not only leads to a lower response but also distorts the results of the study. The concern about the protection of the individual may not be given preference over the importance of participation in a study, in particular for those studies that carry a very limited or non-existent risk or that are not burdensome to the patient.     

Changing constructions of informed consent: qualitative research and complex social worlds

Informed consent is a concept which attempts to capture and convey what is regarded as the appropriate relationship between researcher and research participant. Definitions have traditionally emphasised respect for autonomy and the right to self-determination of the individual. However, the meaning of informed consent and the values on which it is based are grounded in society and the practicalities of social relationships. As society changes, so too do the meaning and practice of informed consent. In this paper, we trace the ways in which the meaning and practice of informed consent has changed over the last 35 years with reference to four qualitative studies of parenting and children in the UK which we have undertaken at different points in our research careers. We focus in particular on the shifting boundaries between the professional and personal, and changing expressions of agency and power in a context of heightened perceptions of risk in everyday life. We also discuss developments in information and communication technologies as a factor in changing both the formal requirements for and the situated practicalities of obtaining informed consent. We conclude by considering the implications for informed consent of both increasing bureaucratic regulation and increasingly sophisticated information and communication technologies and suggest strategies for rethinking and managing 'consent' in qualitative research practice.     

Views of US researchers about informed consent in international collaborative research

Informed consent poses challenges in all settings. Challenges may be particularly great in international collaborative research, where cultural perspectives may differ, and where education levels and language may be barriers to participant understanding. We conducted a written survey and focus groups with US health researchers doing research in developing countries, asking about informed consent and other ethical issues in their research. We present here both qualitative and quantitative data relevant to informed consent. Qualitative data revealed that researchers' experiences and beliefs about informed consent fell into three paradigms: regulatory, community, and individual. The regulatory paradigm refers to researchers' views and practices relating to informed consent requirements of institutional review boards and other oversight bodies. The community paradigm refers to researchers' approach to the content and methodology of informed consent in the context of long-term relationships between research teams and study communities. Researchers emphasized the importance of these relationships for creating and maintaining communication fundamental to the informed consent process. Finally, the individual paradigm refers to researchers' views about individual participants' understanding and decision-making process regarding research. Researchers described community-level influences on participants' decision-making, but stressed the need for individual comprehension and voluntary participation. While these paradigms are distinct, they also are intertwined. Quantitative data supported the existence of these three paradigms in respondents' characterization of informed consent. Researchers frequently stated that legal language on the consent forms was meaningless (52%). Forty-four percent of researchers had consulted with community leaders, and 23% believed the consent process focuses too much on the individual, rather than on family or community. Most researchers (82%) reported that the consent process was an important means of educating participants about the study. Fifty-four percent of researchers believed participants did not understand placebos. Further research is needed to understand how culture and relationships affect research participation, and to provide information and dialogue among researchers, oversight bodies and community representatives about appropriate ways to approach informed consent in international research.     

Third-party informed consent in research with adolescents: the good, the bad and the ugly

Third-party informed consent for child and adolescent participation in research is a legal requirement that has been questioned by authors who argue that children over 10 are fully able to make decisions regarding this matter. The extent to which this requirement encumbers survey researches in this age range has not been fully reported. In order to understand the reasons for the inconsistent use of condoms among adolescent students in Rio de Janeiro, we designed a survey based on an anonymous self-reported questionnaire. Two informed consent terms were distributed: one for the adolescent and one for the legal representative signature. Participation was offered to all students aged 12-18 attending class at the day of the consent term distribution. Among 906 distributed legal represents consent terms, 734 (81%) were not returned. The final sample probably presented a bias of selection. Researchers must foresee third-party consent as a major encumbrance. There is a need for the definition of a range of interventions in which the adolescent might have the legal recognition of autonomy for decision about his/her voluntary participation.     

Empty ethics: the problem with informed consent

Informed consent is increasingly heralded as an ethical panacea, a tool to counter autocratic and paternalistic medical practices. Debate about the implementation of informed consent is constricted and polarised, centering on the right of individuals to be fully informed and to freely choose versus an autocratic, paternalistic practice that negates individual choice. A bioethical framework, based on a principle-led form of reductive/deductive reasoning, dominates the current model of informed consent. Such a model tends to abstract the process of consent from its clinical and social setting. By flashing out the social process involved when patients and healthy volunteer subjects consent to take part in clinical drug trials, this paper attempts to address the problem arising from the current 'empty ethics' model. My arguments are substantiated by qualitative interview data drawn from a study I conducted on the process of consent as experienced by participants in clinical drug trials.     

浅谈医事法学视野下知情同意权的制度研究

知情同意权是医患关系的一项重要内容,它既是患者的权利,同时也是医生的义务.医疗知情同意的实现,有助于增进医患之间和谐的关系.要确保知情同意权的有效实现,不仅需要医患双方对知情同意的深入理解和正确认识,还需要相应的法律制度做保障.     

Patients' perceptions of informed consent in acute myocardial infarction research: a Danish study

Seeking informed consent from patients in the acute phase of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) poses an ethical challenge due to the fact that these patients are under stress and require urgent medical attention. The very procedure of informed consent, which is supposed to protect eligible patients, may in fact cause harm due to a potential delay in the provision of therapy. Whether or not informed consent can and should be obtained under these particular circumstances is far from evident. Patients participating in various large-scale AMI trials have been enrolled with, as well as without, informed consent in recent years. Little is known, however, about how patients experience the informed consent process in the emergency situation of an AMI. This paper reports the results from qualitative interviews with 32 patients, who had to decide whether or not to participate in a large multi-centre clinical trial in Denmark. We analyse to what extent patients found the informed consent process acceptable as well as how various factors influenced their experience of the consent process. We argue that it is morally sound to involve those patients in a brief and concise informed consent process and that consent should be sought in such trials. Finally, we discuss how future AMI trials may nonetheless be improved by accommodating some of the concerns of the patients.     

论生物医学研究中受试者知情同意权的保护

保护生物医学研究中受试者的知情同意权具有重要意义.本文从国内外法律依据、研究者的义务、伦理委员会的作用及受试者自身的维权等方面,探讨如何保护受试者的知情同意权.