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.     

What's so important about conducting research involving third parties?

Controversy has arisen over the long-standing practice of collecting family health and behavioral history information in the course of conducting biomedical research. Identifiable individuals (third parties) on whom investigators collect private data through primary research subjects (probands) also are considered research subjects. At issue is whether informed consent is required from third parties prior to obtaining information about them from probands. A recent federal regulatory ruling dictates that investigators must either obtain informed consent from all third parties or their research must qualify for a waiver of consent. Because of the ruling, a traditional family medical history questionnaire, typical of those routinely used in genetic epidemiologic studies of familial risk, failed to meet the criteria for the waiver. The implications of this ruling are far-reaching. They could influence the quality of research in the United States on the causes of most human diseases. To enable continuing medical and bioethical education on the topic, in March 2001, Virginia Commonwealth University hosted a 2-day open conference, "Third Party Rights and Risks: A Forum on Informed Consent from Persons Affected by the Study of Human Subjects." International leaders from the fields of biomedical ethics and law convened with federal regulatory officials, Institutional Review Board members, academic and industry scientists, and patient-family rights advocates to discuss and debate this critical topic. Conference presenters submitted papers to clarify the issues, promote continued debate, and assist in the formulation of policy recommendations regarding third-party rights and risks.     

Patients' perceptions of research in emergency settings: A study of survivors of sudden cardiac death

Conditions such as stroke, sudden cardiac death, and major traumatic injury are major causes of morbidity and mortality, and there is a need for clinical research to improve treatment for these conditions. However, because informed consent is often impossible, research in these situations poses ethical concerns. Despite growing literature on the ethics of emergency research, little is known about the views of relevant patient populations regarding research in emergency settings conducted under an exception from informed consent (EFIC).     

Ethics of qualitative research: are there special issues for health services research?

BACKGROUND: An increasing volume of qualitative research and articles about qualitative methods has been published recently in medical journals. However, compared with the extensive debate in social sciences literature, there has been little consideration in medical journals of the ethical issues surrounding qualitative research. A possible explanation for this lack of discussion is that it is assumed commonly that qualitative research is unlikely to cause significant harm to participants. There are no agreed guidelines for judging the ethics of qualitative research proposals and there is some evidence that medical research ethics committees have difficulty making these judgements. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to consider the ethical issues which arise when planning and carrying out qualitative research into health and health care, and to offer a framework within which health services researchers can consider these issues. RESULTS: Four potential risks to research participants are discussed: anxiety and distress; exploitation; misrepresentation; and identification of the participant in published papers, by themselves or others. Recommended strategies for reducing the risk of harm include ensuring scientific soundness, organizing follow-up care where appropriate, considering obtaining consent as a process, ensuring confidentiality and taking a reflexive stance towards analysis. CONCLUSIONS: While recognizing the reservations held about strict ethical guidelines for qualitative research, we argue for further debate of these issues so that the health services research community can move towards the adoption of agreed standards of good practice. In addition, we suggest that empirical research is desirable in order to quantify the actual risks to participants in qualitative studies.     

Disclosing the truth: informed participation in the Antemortem Database Project for Survivors of Srebrenica

This article describes a human rights investigation designed to identify bodies exhumed from mass graves in Srebrenica, Bosnia-Herzegovina and the psychological impact of participation on family members, most of whom believed the disappeared could still be alive. A community education intervention, conducted in both group and individual settings, was effective in helping families make an informed decision about participation. For informed participants, the psychological benefits outweighed any deleterious effects. The article concludes that fully disclosing the truth to potential participants, providing culturally and temporally sensitive psychosocial preparation, and securing informed consent are basic ethical and human rights principles that must be upheld at all times. Further studies are necessary to measure the impact of human rights activities of this nature on the survivor participants and implementers alike.     

Trust and informed consent: insights from community members on the Kenyan coast

Trust is an important theme running through the literature on the ethics of biomedical research, but it is rarely given centre stage. In this paper, we present data gathered from a study aimed at exploring community views regarding the informed consent processes carried out by a large research centre on the Kenyan Coast. The findings point to the centrality of trust and elements of mistrust in general community views, in parents' (mis)understanding of studies they consent their children to be involved in, in refusals and concerns, and in community members' views about whether informed consent is a relevant and practical model to follow. Tentative ideas on how trust and a healthy mistrust might be balanced highlight the importance of strengthening communication surrounding basic health care as well as research, and of fostering 'an inner generated ethic of service'. The latter is particularly fundamental, but cannot be built and regulated through the laws, policies and guidelines that currently govern biomedical research practice.     

Attitudes to bioethical issues: a case study of a screening project

Commonly expressed in theoretical discussions about ethical problems in the context of epidemiology and screening is the need for more data. A study was carried out involving 21 explorative interviews with participant and nonparticipant mothers in a neonatal research screening project in progress in Sweden, ABIS (All Babies in Southeast Sweden). The respondents were asked, by way of open-ended questions, to give their opinions about certain ethical issues: informed consent; reasons for joining/declining; surrogate decision; the collection, analysis and storage of written and "live" material (biobanks); intervention etc. The ethical implications mentioned in the literature mostly concern the risk of creating distress and anxiety (anxiety and possible stigmatisation in respect of positive or false-positive results, worry about material collected and stored, distress caused by blood sampling procedures, etc.). Our results do not support the idea that the risks are substantial. The respondents rather indicate an attitude of benevolence--they are positive both to the current research on children, to the material they contribute (both written material and "biomaterial"), to possible results and intervention plans. On the other hand the participants expressed concern about the storage of material and the right to be informed of any screening/project results. Further studies in this field are needed and would be of help in theoretical discussion, the work of ethical committees and the designing of, for example, screening and research projects.     

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.     

Informed consent, anticipatory regulation and ethnographic practice

In this paper we examine the application of informed consent to ethnographic research in health care settings. We do not quarrel with either the principle of informed consent or its translation into the requirement that research should only be carried out with consenting participants. However, we do challenge the identification of informed consent with the particular set of bureaucratic practices of ethical review which currently operate in Canada, the US and elsewhere. We argue that these anticipatory regulatory regimes threaten the significant contribution of ethnographic research to the creation of more efficient, more effective, more equitable and more humane health care systems. Informed consent in ethnographic research is neither achievable nor demonstrable in the terms set by anticipatory regulatory regimes that take clinical research or biomedical experimentation as their paradigm cases. This is because of differences in the practices of ethnographic and biomedical research which we discuss. These include the extended periods of time ethnographers spend in the research setting, the emergent nature of ethnographic research focus and design, the nature and positioning of risk in ethnographic research, the power relationships between researchers and participants, and the public and semi-public nature of the settings normally studied. Anticipatory regulatory regimes are inimical to ethnographic research and risk undermining the contribution of systematic inquiry to understanding whether institutions do what they claim to do, fairly and civilly and with an appropriate mobilisation of resources. We do not suggest that we should simply ignore ethics or leave matters to the individual consciences of researchers. Rather, we need to develop and strengthen professional models of regulation which emphasise education, training and mutual accountability. We conclude the paper with a number of suggestions about how such professional models might be implemented.     

Review of ethical aspects in biomedical research. The experience of the Ethics Committee of the Center for Toxic Oil Syndrome and Rare Diseases [CISATER]

This Field Note aims to make known the decisions taken by the Ethics Committee of the Instituto de Salud Carlos III for Toxic Oil Syndrome regarding the secondary use of research specimens in biological research when informed consent is lacking. This is a common concern in the field of biomedical research. After debating the ethical suitability of the secondary use of these samples, our main conclusion is that researchers conducting prospective studies should expressly solicit written informed consent from participants in the study about i) whether there will or could be any secondary use of the samples and, if so, ii) whether such secondary use would be conditional on the type of research.     

Navigating the ethics of cross‐cultural health promotion research

Health promotion researchers must consider the ethics of their research, and are usually required to abide by a set of ethical requirements stipulated by governing bodies (such as the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council) and human research ethics committees (HRECs). These requirements address both deontological (rule‐based) and consequence‐based issues. However, at times there can be a disconnect between the requirements of deontological issues and the cultural sensitivity required when research is set in cultural contexts and settings etic to the HREC. This poses a challenge for health promotion researchers who must negotiate between meeting both the requirements of the HREC and the needs of the community with whom the research is being conducted. Drawing on two case studies, this paper discusses examples from cross‐cultural health promotion research in Australian and international settings where disconnect arose and negotiation was required to appropriately meet the needs of all parties. The examples relate to issues of participant recruitment and informed consent, participants under the Australian legal age of consent, participant withdrawal when this seemingly occurs in an ad hoc rather than a formal manner and reciprocity. Although these approaches are context specific, they highlight issues for consideration to advance more culturally appropriate practice in research ethics and suggest ways a stronger anthropological lens can be applied to research ethics to overcome these challenges.     

Beginning community engagement at a busy biomedical research programme: experiences from the KEMRI CGMRC-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Kilifi, Kenya

There is wide acknowledgement of the need for community engagement in biomedical research, particularly in international settings. Recent debates have described theoretical approaches to identifying situations where this is most critical and potential mechanisms to achieve it. However, there is relatively little published experience of community engagement in practice. A major component of the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) Wellcome Trust Research Programme is centred on Kilifi District General Hospital and surrounding community of 240,000 local residents. Documented community perceptions of the research centre are generally positive, but many indicate a low understanding of research and therapeutic misconceptions of its activities. As in other settings, these misunderstandings have contributed to concerns and rumours, and potentially undermine ethical aspects of research and local trust in the institution. Through a series of consultative activities, a community engagement strategy has been developed in Kilifi to strengthen mutual understanding between community members and the Centre. One important component is the establishment of a representative local resident network in different geographic locations commonly involved in research, to supplement existing communication channels. Early implementation of the strategy has provided new and diverse opportunities for dialogue, interaction and partnership building. Through the complex social interactions inherent in the community engagement strategy, the centre aims to build context specific ethical relations with local residents and to strengthen understanding of how ethical principles can be applied in practice. Evaluations over time will assess the effectiveness and sustainability of these strategies, provide generalisable information for similar research settings, and contribute to debates on the universality of ethical principles for research. This paper aims to summarise the rationale for community engagement in research, drawing on published literature and local findings, to outline the process of community engagement in Kilifi and to describe issues emerging from its development and early implementation.     

医学期刊编辑对生物医学研究伦理问题的处理方式调研及建议

【目的】 探讨医学期刊编辑处理生物医学研究伦理问题的方式,为推动确立医学期刊伦理审查规范提供参考。【方法】 通过问卷星向国内医学期刊编辑发放调查问卷,对审稿时和论文出版后处理医学伦理相关问题的方式展开调研。【结果】 共回收问卷230份。调查显示:在审稿阶段,在保护患者隐私方面,英文期刊、中英双语期刊的编辑更注重要求作者提供授权同意相关证明材料;中、英文期刊以及中英双语期刊的编辑对涉及人体试验伦理问题的处理方式都比较规范。但是,对于研究是否获得患者知情同意、动物实验研究是否经过伦理委员会审查、回顾性研究是否需要伦理审查、涉及人的研究是否在临床试验注册中心注册等问题,编辑还需要进一步重视。在论文出版后,编辑发现的医学伦理问题主要是“涉及人的研究未说明是否经过伦理委员会审查”。对论文出版后发现的没有保护患者隐私和没有在临床试验注册中心注册的问题,大部分期刊缺乏相关处理方案。【结论】 编辑应加强对论文知情同意、动物实验伦理、回顾性研究伦理的审查,并审查涉及人的研究是否在临床试验注册中心注册,以推动我国医学期刊的高质量发展。     

A model designed to enhance informed consent: experiences from the HIV prevention trials network

HIV prevention research in developing countries has resulted in increased attention to and discussion of ethical issues, particularly the issue of the quality of informed consent. We present a conceptual framework for an enhanced informed consent process, drawing on experiences garnered from domestic and international studies conducted by the HIV Prevention Trials Network, funded by the National Institutes of Health. This framework guides the development of an informed consent process designed to help ensure initial and continued comprehension of research participation, with an emphasis on HIV prevention research. Attention is focused at the individual and community levels and on 3 study phases: preenrollment, enrollment, and postenrollment.     

A consumer perspective on informed consent and third-party issues.

Our two children were diagnosed with a rare genetic disorder, which led us to establish a research foundation. This led to in-depth consideration of issues surrounding informed consent from a consumer perspective. Third-party issues arose as central to the formulation of ethical policy in the establishment of a blood and tissue bank and an epidemiologic study. We suggest that a number of myths--privacy is possible, samples can be stripped of identifiers, humans are subjects, voluntary informed consent is attainable, genetics is about the individual only, genetic information is different than other medical information, research is altruistic, the public will learn truths about genetic research via media, and research is culturally competent--make it difficult to resolve the issues intrinsic to informed consent. A number of important elements could make policy decisions less complicated. These include conducting culturally competent research; conveying noncoercive hope, not hype; contacting the voluntary informant only; asking the informant to extend contact to other family members; requiring a comprehensive informed consent process for all contacted; and engaging in state-of-the-art data protections. There is a need for a "Genomic Hippocratic Oath," creating an ethical basis for research similar to the one vowed by health care professionals. Establishing ethical policies as a result of the collaboration of policy makers, researchers, and consumers will allow research to progress ethically at a rapid rate. If regulations are oppressive, they will thwart research; if they are too lenient, participants will not receive protections needed to participate safely.     

Bioethics: problems and prospects within a research institute

Bioethics aims to identify an ethical framework by means of a multidisciplinary debate open to the scientific community, in order to allow support to scientists involved in biomedical research. The Istituto Superiore di Sanità (Italian National Institute of Health) has recognized the need for an ethical review board to cope with the problems of different researches carried on within the Institute. An Ethics Committee, better defined as an Independent Review Board, has therefore been appointed by the Minister of Health in order to evaluate different research proposals ranging from clinical trials to non clinical biomedical research. The experience of the first Committee is described.     

Informed consent from cognitively impaired persons participating in research trials: comparative law observations

This article addresses the ethical requirements to be considered when conducting clinical trials involving human subjects whose mental condition limits their ability to understand the information and to express fully autonomous and informed consent. It does not address other categories of vulnerable persons, such as children, or advanced directives concerning end-of-life care. There are many ethical issues entailed in clinical trials involving subjects with mental disabilities: how to obtain informed consent, balancing risks and benefits, balancing individual benefits with collective scientific and social interests, legal representation and many more. This article focuses on the issues surrounding the concept of minimal risk and the relationship between informed consent and risk. These issues are addressed with particular emphasis on the regulations adopted by the European Union and the federal government of the United States of America. The conclusion proposes a list of working criteria.     

Biobanks and the ‘well-being’ of humanity: integrating consent to research with the capability approach

Among the important ethical challenges that biobanks raise, the shortcoming of the traditional acceptation of informed consent is one of the most debated. The protection of research participants’ autonomy is a central theme in current ethical reasoning on biomedical research. In this article, I argue that moral philosophy offers the opportunity to broaden the debate raised by the shortcomings of the established doctrine of informed consent when applied to biobanking activities. The capability approach and deliberative democracy theories are particularly interesting in analyzing biobanks and informed consent because they shift the focus from the relationships patient/physician and participants in research/investigator–the bioethics focus–to the well-being of research participants and their ability to self-determination understood as a mean by which individuals participate in the societal arrangements that underscore biobanks’ regulation, thus fostering the democratic deliberative process. My claim is that many ethical issues raised are better understood and eventually solved if a broader definition of the notion of autonomy as put forth by moral and political theory is integrated in the discourse of biobanking and informed consent.

Philosophy is like this: eternally unsettled and only occasionally disturbed by new facts

Matt Ridley, Nature via Nurture, p.23     

Simulated Patient Studies: An Ethical Analysis

Context: In connection with health care reform, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services commissioned a “mystery shopper,” or simulated patient study, to measure access to primary care. But the study was shelved because of public controversy over “government spying” on doctors. Opponents of the study also raised ethical concerns about the use of deception with human subjects without soliciting their informed consent. Methods: We undertook an ethical analysis of the use of simulated patient techniques in health services research, with a particular focus on research measuring access to care. Using a case study, we explored relevant methodological considerations and ethical principles relating to deceptive research without informed consent, as well as U.S. federal regulations permitting exceptions to consent. Findings: Several relevant considerations both favor and oppose soliciting consent for simulated patient studies. Making research participation conditional on informed consent protects the autonomy of research subjects and shields them from unreasonable exposure to research risks. However, scientific validity is also an important ethical principle of human subjects research, as the net risks to subjects must be justified by the value to society of the knowledge to be gained. The use of simulated patients to monitor access is a naturalistic and scientifically sound experimental design that can answer important policy‐relevant questions, with minimal risks to human subjects. As interaction between researchers and subjects increases, however, so does the need for consent. Conclusions: As long as adequate protections of confidentiality of research data are in place, minimally intrusive simulated patient research that gathers policy‐relevant data on the health system without the consent of individuals working in that system can be ethically justified when the risks and burdens to research subjects are minimal and the research has the potential to generate socially valuable knowledge.     

Confusions in the equipoise concept and the alternative of fully informed overlapping rational decisions

Despite its several variations, the central position of equipoise is that subjects in clinical experiments should not be randomized to conditions when others believe that better alternatives exist. This position has been challenged over issues of which group in the medical or research community is authorized to make that determination, and it has been argued that informed consent provides sufficient ethical protection for participants independent of equipoise. In this paper I frame ethical participation in clinical research as a two-party decision process involving offering and accepting participation under informed consent. Nine conditions are identified in which it is possible that potential participants and researchers or care professionals can rationally choose divergent actions based on identical understandings of the situation. Under such circumstances, researchers or care professionals cannot ethically substitute their understanding of equipoise in the situation for the patients’ choices, or vice versa.