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.     

Public Perceptions of Ethical Issues Regarding Adult Predictive Genetic Testing

The purpose of this study was to explore the views of members of the general public regarding ethical issues in adult predictive genetic testing. The literature pertaining to ethical issues regarding to adult predictive genetic testing is largely restricted to the views of ‘experts’ who have emphasized informed consent, patent issues, and insurance discrimination. Occasionally the views of patients who have undergone genetic counselling and testing have been elicited, adding psychosocial and family issues. However, the general public has not had the opportunity to contribute. In order to explore theatre as a health policy research tool, 1,200 audience members attended the play ‘Sarah’s Daughters’ in seven Canadian cities, following which audience discussions were audiotaped. This study performed a secondary qualitative analysis of the data to identify the ethical issues of adult predictive genetic testing important to members of the general public. The identified issues were: (1) need for public education; (2) choice to undergo genetic counselling and testing; (3) access to genetic counselling and testing; and (4) obligations regarding the handling of genetic information. Audience members emphasized public education and access to information regarding potential choices, which was different from the emphasis on informed consent and other ethical issues prominent in the literature. Members of the general public emphasized ethical issues that were different than those identified by experts and patients. It is essential that members of the public be included in complex and controversial public policy decisions.     

Genes, ownership, and indigenous reality

Recent genetic research has led to questions about the ownership of genetic material. These questions have been addressed within a discussion about information and ownership but not all cultures accept this framework. Indigenous groups may have concepts that are either ignored or translated into the language of ownership. We explore the problematic notion of ownership of the body and genetic material in some cultural settings and shift the "conceptual lens" through which the issue is viewed to one that is more appropriate to indigenous thoughts about genes and DNA. We then use the example of New Zealand to indicate some ways in which culturally informed conceptualisations can transform some of the ethical issues involved in genetic information and property disputes and underpin recommendations in this area of bioethics and health care research.     

Privacy and ethics in pediatric environmental health research-part II: protecting families and communities

BACKGROUND: In pediatric environmental health research, information about family members is often directly sought or indirectly obtained in the process of identifying child risk factors and helping to tease apart and identify interactions between genetic and environmental factors. However, federal regulations governing human subjects research do not directly address ethical issues associated with protections for family members who are not identified as the primary "research participant." Ethical concerns related to family consent and privacy become paramount as pediatric environmental health research increasingly turns to questions of gene-environment interactions. OBJECTIVES: In this article I identify issues arising from and potential solutions for the privacy and informed consent challenges of pediatric environmental health research intended to adequately protect the rights and welfare of children, family members, and communities. DISCUSSION: I first discuss family members as secondary research participants and then the specific ethical challenges of longitudinal research on late-onset environmental effects and gene-environment interactions. I conclude with a discussion of the confidentiality and social risks of recruitment and data collection of research conducted within small or unique communities, ethnic minority populations, and low-income families. CONCLUSIONS: The responsible conduct of pediatric environmental health research must be conceptualized as a goodness of fit between the specific research context and the unique characteristics of subjects and other family stakeholders.     

Informed consent and biobanks: a population-based study of attitudes towards tissue donation for genetic research

AIMS: The procurement and usage of tissue samples has begun receiving increasing legal and ethical attention. The authors' aim was to develop an empirically based understanding of public attitudes to the use of tissue for research. METHOD: A questionnaire was distributed to a randomized sample (n=1,000) of the population in the age group 18-85 in V?sterbotten County, Sweden. RESULTS: The response rate was approximately 60%. There was a general acceptance of genetic research based on biobank material (71%) but, though it is often a prerequisite for tissue-based research, a majority (62%) would not allow researchers to examine their healthcare records without specific consent. A majority (66.8%) accepted surrogate decisions by research ethical committees; 48% of the respondents estimated that they would feel respected if they were notified each time a sample was used. When compared and ranked with other issues, informed consent was a principal concern to a minority (4%) only. Should research efforts generate information on future health risks, a majority (55%) would want to be told only if treatment was available. CONCLUSION: Though genetic research in bioethical debate is often viewed as a potential threat to the integrity of the donor, the confidentiality of medical records still seems to concern donors more. Research ethical committees have support in the majority of the population for some surrogate decisions. The current emphasis on the question of informed consent in policy making for biobank-based research does not seem to be reflected unambiguously in the concerns of the general public.     

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.     

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.     

The informed consent aftermath of the genetic revolution. An Italian example of implementation

A great part of human genetics research is carried out collecting data and building large databases of biological samples that are in a non-anonymous format. These constitute a valuable resource for future research. The construction of such databases and tissue banks facilitates important scientific progress. However, biobanks have been recognized as ethically problematic because they contain thousands of data that could expose individuals and populations to discrimination, stigmatization and psychological stress if misused. Informed consent is regarded as a cornerstone in the protection of personal autonomy in research involving human subjects. Yet in recent years this fundamental concept has been overwhelmed by the genomic revolution. From a general overview of international literature, it seems evident that informed consent issues have come into sharp focus, in particular in relation to the twin issues of time extension (blanket versus specific/repeated consent) and personal extension (group consent). After an introduction on obtaining informed consent in the context of genetic research, this paper addresses the apparent lack of a single, universal model of obtaining informed consent among populations involved in genetic research and it argues for the need to develop an ethical framework tailored to the specific features of each project. In order to support this theory of contextualizing, the case of a private biotechnology company, SharDNA is presented. The present paper explores the management of its biobank, developed from a genetic research project carried out on isolated populations living on the Italian island of Sardinia. In particular, the paper highlights how the company is tackling the problem of informed consent and other ethical requirements for genetic research, such as the respect of individual privacy, the population approach and the existing Italian legal regulatory framework.     

A qualitative study of subject recruitment for familial cancer research

PURPOSE: Familial epidemiological studies of cancer raise familiar ethical issues relating to informed consent and recruitment of participants. When the family is the unit of study, however, additional complexity arises. Educating and recruiting participants must be tailored to the relatives', as well as the proband's needs. An understanding of the prospective participants' concerns will aid the development of strategies for recruitment and will facilitate informed and voluntary consent. In the present study, qualitative methods were used to investigate these issues. METHODS: Focus groups with cancer patients, relatives of cancer patients, and individuals from the general population were separately conducted to identify issues that concern people who are asked to participate in family studies. RESULTS: Many of the issues which arose in the course of the focus group discussions were similar to those in any study. Yet, some of the themes emerging from the discussions were specific to familial research. In particular, participants expressed that the study should be endorsed by a trusted and familiar source; group discussions might facilitate the consent process; the benefit of the research should be clear and personal, as well as benefit the participants' family members; risks of participation should be explicit (e.g., insurance discrimination); and education about the disease and its familial nature would maintain commitment to the study. Finally, participants expressed concerns about being approached by programs to facilitate the identification and recruitment of other family members for research on family health issues. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study will aid future familial studies in developing a protocol that both adequately informs potential participants of the nature of familial research and maximize participation.     

Motivating Donors to Genetic Research? Anthropological Reasons to Rethink the Role of Informed Consent

In this article we explore the contribution from social anthropology to the medical ethical debates about the use of informed consent in research, based on blood samples and other forms of tissue. The article springs from a project exploring donors’ motivation for providing blood and healthcare data for genetic research to be executed by a Swedish start-up genomics company. This article is not confined to empirical findings, however, as we suggest that anthropology provides reason to reassess the theoretical understanding of autonomy as generally defined by Beauchamp and Childress. Careful consideration of the trust expressed by donors through the act of donation, furthermore, suggests that there is reason to redirect the ethical scrutiny from informed consent to issues concerning institutional arrangements and social responsibility. In particular, we suggest that an anthropological approach could facilitate a reconsideration of the political implications of using informed consent as a regulatory practice in tissue-based research.     

Proposing modesty for informed consent

The extension of informed consent into social science research has met with considerable opposition. The history and concept of informed consent, however, is based on a substantive ethical notion of the research relationship as informed and voluntary that is appropriate for social science research relationships. Yet social science research might sometimes be different from health research in ways that justify a different approach to informed consent and research relationships. Social science research tends to have a lower magnitude of risk, usually does not need to disrupt the therapeutic assumption common in health research contexts or when researchers are health professionals, and recruitment is sometimes incremental and reflects a building of trust and development of the research participant's role. These differences may sometimes justify novel approaches to the research relationship and require case-by-case evaluation to determine their relevance to establishing the informed and voluntary nature of the relationship through the use of informed consent procedures. Ultimately, respect for research participants requires social research into practices that can support or replace informed consent. The institutional role of informed consent and the goal of informed and voluntary research participation serve modest but important roles in health and social research. Their proper role in health and social research requires flexibility and experimentation, but does not justify abdication of informed consent or the notion of informed and voluntary participation.     

Family consent and the pursuit of better medicines through genetic research.

Rapid changes in the science and technology related to genetic research are challenging scientists, health care providers, ethicists, regulators, patient groups, and the pharmaceutical industry to keep pace with ethically grounded, workable guidelines for both the research and clinical applications of human genetics. We describe the genetic research being conducted by one pharmaceutical company (GlaxoSmithKline) and how the company is addressing the ethical, legal, and social issues surrounding this research; discuss an industry working group's attempt to advance pharmacogenetic research by openly addressing and disseminating information on related ethical, legal, and regulatory issues; identify scientific and ethical differences among various types of genetic research; discuss potential implications of family consent on subject privacy and autonomy, data collection, and study conduct; and suggest points to consider when study sponsors, investigators, and ethics committees evaluate research proposals. Public and expert opinion regarding informed consent in genetic research is evolving as a result of increased education, discussion, and understanding of the relevant issues. Five years ago, there was strong support for anonymity in genetic research as a privacy safeguard. Now, an increasingly popular school of thought advocates against anonymity to preserve an individual's ability to withdraw and, if desired, access research results. It is important to recognize this evolution and address consent issues in a reasoned, practical, and consistent way, including input from patients and their families, health care providers, ethicists, scientists, regulatory bodies, research sponsors, and the lay community. Responsibility for assessing issues related to family consent for research should remain with local investigators, ethics boards, and study sponsors. A "one-size-fits-all" perspective in the form of new regulations, for example, would likely be a disservice to all.     

'Even if they ask you to stand by a tree all day, you will have to do it (laughter)...!': community voices on the notion and practice of informed consent for biomedical research in developing countries

Ethical dilemmas in biomedical research, especially in vulnerable populations, often spark heated debate. Despite recommendations and guidelines, many issues remain controversial, including the relevance, prioritisation and application of individual voluntary informed consent in non-Western settings. The voices of the people likely to be the subjects of research have been notably absent from the debate. We held discussions with groups of community members living in the rural study area of a large research unit in Kenya. Discussions were facilitated by three research study vignettes outlining one field-based and two hospital-based studies being planned or taking place at the time. In addition to gathering general views about the aims and activities of the research unit, questions focused on whether consent should be sought for studies, and if so from whom (chiefs, elders, men/women, children), and on ascertaining whether there are any special concerns about the physical act of signing consent forms. The findings revealed the community's difficulty in distinguishing research from clinical investigations conducted in clinical settings. There was a spectrum of views regarding perceived appropriateness of consent procedures, in part because of difficulty in disentangling clinical from research aims, and because of other challenges to applying consent in practice. Debates between community members highlight the inadequacy of simplistic assumptions about community members' views on informed consent, and the complexity of incorporating lay opinions into biomedical research. Failure to appreciate these issues risks exaggerating differences between settings, and underestimating the time and resources required to ensure meaningful community involvement in research processes. Ultimately, it risks inadequately responding to the needs and values of those on whom the success of most biomedical research depends. Although compliance with community views does not necessarily make the research more ethical, it is argued that community opinions on local issues and practices should inform ethical decision-making in health research.     

Beyond "misunderstanding": written information and decisions about taking part in a genetic epidemiology study

Although the need to obtain "informed" consent is institutionalised as a principle of ethical practice in research, there is persistent evidence that the meanings people attribute to research tend to be substantially at variance with what might be deemed "correct". One dominant account in the ethics literature has been to treat apparent "misunderstandings" as a technical problem, to be fixed through improving the written information given to research candidates. We aimed to explore theoretically and empirically the role of written information in "informing" participants in research. We conducted a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 29 unpaid healthy volunteers who took part in a genetic epidemiology study in Leicestershire, UK. Data analysis was based on the constant comparative method. We found that people may make sense of information about research, including the content of written information, in complex and unexpected ways. Many participants were unable to identify precisely the aim of the study in which they had participated, saw their participation as deriving from a moral imperative, and had understandings of issues such as feedback of DNA results that were inconsistent with what had been explained in the written information about the study. They had high levels of confidence in the organisations conducting the research, and consequently had few concerns about their participation. These findings, which suggest that some "misunderstanding" may be a persistent and incorrigible feature of people's participation in research, raise questions about the principle of informed consent and about the role of written information. These questions need to be addressed through engagement and dialogue between the research, research participants, social science, and ethics communities.     

Ethical problems of recording physician-patient interactions in family practice settings

Recordings of actual physician-patient interactions are an important tool for family medicine education and research. Their use, however, poses two sets of ethical problems: one dealing with privacy and confidentiality, and another related to limitations upon informed consent in the context of ordinary medical care. Experience with audiotaping and videotaping led to engaging in a "principle-based" method of ethical reasoning in which problems generated by difficult cases were examined in light of both current rules or guidelines and four fundamental ethical principles. Through this approach specific policies were developed for voluntary, informed consent and for protection of privacy, while recognizing that each case must be judged in the light of the physician's obligation to do the best for each patient.     

The association between urinary kidney injury molecule 1 and urinary cadmium in elderly during long-term, low-dose cadmium exposure: a pilot study

In recent years there has been a major change on the part of funders, particularly in North America, so that data sharing is now considered to be the norm rather than the exception. We believe that data sharing is a good idea. However, we also believe that it is inappropriate to prescribe exactly when or how researchers should preserve and share data, since these issues are highly specific to each study, the nature of the data collected, who is requesting it, and what they intend to do with it. The level of ethical concern will vary according to the nature of the information, and the way in which it is collected - analyses of anonymised hospital admission records may carry a quite different ethical burden than analyses of potentially identifiable health information collected directly from the study participants. It is striking that most discussions about data sharing focus almost exclusively on issues of ownership (by the researchers or the funders) and efficiency (on the part of the funders). There is usually little discussion of the ethical issues involved in data sharing, and its implications for the study participants. Obtaining prior informed consent from the participants does not solve this problem, unless the informed consent process makes it completely clear what is being proposed, in which case most study participants would not agree. Thus, the undoubted benefits of data sharing does not remove the obligations and responsibilities that the original investigators hold for the people they invited to participate in the study.     

The use of personal data from medical records and biological materials: ethical perspectives and the basis for legal restrictions in health research

This paper discusses the moral justification for using personal data without informed consent, from both medical records and biological materials, in research where subjects are not physically present in the study and will never have any contact with the study investigators. Although the idea of waiving the requirement for informed consent in certain investigations has been mentioned in several ethical guidelines formulated by epidemiologists and physicians since the late 1980s, these guidelines are now of limited use due to legal restrictions on the use of personal data in most western countries. Several misconceptions that form the basis for legal restriction of health research are discussed: lack of knowledge of the need to link personal information from health services with personal information produced outside the health system in many biomedical investigations; the assumption of a deterministic model of disease causation in which the prediction of disease occurrence is based on a genetic association despite the fact that most genotypes for common diseases are incompletely penetrant; the lack of a logical rationale for the recommendation in the Declaration of Helsinki that only research that offers some benefit to study subjects is justified; the great lack of knowledge about research methodology revealed in some alternatives proposed to avoid using personal data; and the lack of a debate about the ethical double standard of institutions and investigators in countries that prohibit the use of personal data but finance and carry out studies in other countries where it is permitted.     

Ethics of Informed Consent for Pragmatic Trials with New Interventions

Objectives: Pragmatic trials evaluate the comparative benefits, risks, and burdens of health care interventions in real-world conditions. Such studies are now recognized as valuable to the perimarketing stage of drug development and evaluation, with early pragmatic trials (EPTs) being explored as a means to generate real-world evidence at the time of regulatory market approval. In this article, we present an analysis of the ethical issues involved in informed consent for EPTs, in light of the generally recognized concern that traditional ethical rules governing randomized clinical trials, such as lengthy informed consent procedures, could threaten the “real world” nature of such trials. Specifically, we examine to what extent modifications (waivers or alterations) to regulatory consent for EPTs would be ethical. Methods: We first identify broadly accepted necessary conditions for modifications of informed consent (namely, the research involves no more than minimal risk of harm, the research is impracticable with regulatory consent, and the alternative to regulatory consent does not violate legitimate patient expectations) and then apply those criteria to the premarket and early postmarket contexts. Results and Conclusions: The analysis shows that neither waivers nor alterations of regulatory consent for premarket EPTs will be ethically permissible. For postmarket EPTs with newly approved interventions, waivers of consent will be ethically problematic, but some studies might be conducted in an ethical manner with alterations to regulatory consent.