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.     

The ethics of socio-cultural risk research

In socio-cultural risk research, an epistemological tension often follows if real hazards in the world are juxtaposed against the essentially socially constructed nature of all risk. In this editorial, we consider how this paradox is manifest at a practical level in a number of ethical dilemmas for the risk researcher. (1) In terms of strategies for seeking informed consent, and for addressing the power inequalities involved in interpretative and analytical work, researchers can find themselves pushing at the boundaries of standard understandings of ethical practices and ways of engaging informants in their studies. (2) Impact on participants is another key area of concern, since the subject matter on which data are collected in risk research may be a source of uncertainty, anxiety or unwanted self knowledge. (3) Risk researchers also face the possibility of institutional repercussions of raising risk issues with people who usually normalize the risks, thereby stimulating distrust in the institutions or organizations with formal responsibilities for risk management. There are no simple formulae to guide the researcher in dealing with such ethical issues and paradoxes. It is important, though, to recognize their specificity in risk studies, including the ambiguous status of questions about vulnerability since judgements about ‘who is vulnerable’ and ‘in what ways’ are themselves influenced by the situational framings and understandings of participants and researchers.     

Is my mum going to hear this? Methodological and ethical challenges in qualitative health research with young people

Ethical issues arise in all research settings. However, qualitative research with young people raises specific dilemmas that warrant special attention. In this paper we describe an ethical dilemma that arose during a qualitative project we carried out exploring self-management of chronic illness in adolescents. A participant disclosed details of poor adherence with medication, which had significant health implications. Prior to this disclosure he had been assured of confidentiality and thus we found ourselves unsure of how to proceed. Here, we analyse the case in detail, highlighting the ethically important moments, the options for action and the implications of these. We do this with the aim of facilitating ethical mindfulness and thus, ultimately, ethical research practice. As a backdrop to this case we consider the broader ethical context. We find that qualitative research is susceptible to ethical dilemmas because: (1) it is not always possible to predict all possible questions and responses; (2) the nature of the relationship between researchers and participants is amenable to sensitive disclosures; (3) the process of qualitative research can make it difficult for participants to voice concerns or withdraw; and (4) participants' identities are generally known to researchers, complicating boundary issues. Research with young people is susceptible to ethical dilemmas because: (1) young people have limited life experience; (2) consent is often required from both young people and parents; (3) issues of competence can complicate assumptions about informed consent; and (4) the power differential between researchers and participants is significant. When combining qualitative research methods and young participants, the scope for ethical risk is thus substantial.     

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.     

Meaningful informed consent with young children: looking forward through an interactive narrative approach

Ideas about ethical research with young children are evolving at a rapid rate. Not only can young children participate in the informed consent process, but researchers now also recognize that the process must be meaningful for them. As part of a larger study, this article reviews children's rights and informed consent literature as the foundation for the development of a new conceptual model of meaningful early childhood informed consent. Based on this model, an ‘interactive narrative’ approach is presented as a means to inform three- to eight-year-old children about what their participation might involve and to assist them to understand and respond as research participants. For use with small groups, this approach revolves around a storybook based on research-related factual images delivered via interactive (re)telling. This narrative approach to informed consent is unique in its holistic design which seeks to address the specific needs of young children in research.     

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.     

Informed consent in China: quality of information provided to participants in a research project

AIMS: A study was carried out of informed consent strategies in an epidemiological project approved by the regional research ethics committees in Sweden and China and conducted in three areas south-west of Shanghai. METHODS: All participants in the epidemiological project (EP) were included in the research ethical study (RES), which was conducted as a questionnaire-based interview survey in the three areas. Answers were collected by five field interviewers. RESULTS: All participants included answered the questionnaire. Almost all perceived the information provided as rather good or quite good. However, a majority (on average 76%) had the impression that the EP was part of routine healthcare measures, and not a research project. Almost all participants felt free to abstain from participation although 38% in area II stated that they had not been informed about freedom to abstain from participation. A large proportion of participants did not fully understand the nature of the EP. However, almost all participants stated that they would agree to participate in a similar study in the future. CONCLUSION: Although informed consent procedures are supposed to be internationally applicable our study illustrates that it is not always easy to convey information and obtain consent in the present study setting.     

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.     

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。     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Expanding the boundaries of previously obtained informed consent in research: Views from participants in the Personalised Risk-based Mammascreening study

Introduction

Understanding participants' concerns and information needs regarding broadened consent is crucial to ensure transparency and participant autonomy. Our study qualitatively examined these issues in women participating in the Personalized RISk-based MAmmascreening study (PRISMA). The original PRISMA informed consent was project-specific (i.e., breast cancer research), limiting the scope of secondary research. We explored participants' needs for broadened consent to preserve informed decision-making while maximising the potential re-use of data.

Methods

Focus groups (FGs) were performed following a semistructured discussion guide. Two independent researchers analysed the data thematically using an inductive approach.

Findings

Twenty-three asymptomatic women and 13 women diagnosed with breast cancer were randomly divided into six FGs. Four superordinate themes were identified: (1) Normalization, (2) Attitude towards the pharmaceutical industry, (3) Privacy and (4) Knowledge. Our participants viewed data sharing as an important conduit for advancing medical science. Perceived integrity was more often attributed to noncommercial than commercial parties, with a marked mistrust towards the pharmaceutical industry. Most requested information needs related to data protection. Participants' ideal consent process would confer a range of options; for example, they would be able to choose with whom data can be shared, whether data will be de-identified or anonymous, the expiration date of their consent and how, if requested, general and personal study results would be disclosed.

Conclusion

Our participants expressed clear information needs and a strong desire to be actively engaged in future data sharing decisions. Given that many researchers collaborate with commercial parties, building public confidence in these institutions would be beneficial. Illustrative examples addressing privacy concerns and clarifying difficult terms would aid consent decision-making. Although our participants displayed great altruism in sharing their data and accepted that broad consent would ultimately facilitate future research, broad consent did not reflect their ideal situation. Dynamic consent may be an option but warrants further feasibility research.

Patient and Public Contribution

Women were recruited from the general breast cancer screening population. Their perceptions and information needs, as reported in this study, will not only inform broadened consent for PRISMA but ideally guide other consent templates and decisions regarding consent processes.     

Sampling and ethical issues in a multicenter study on health of people with intellectual disabilities

ObjectivesTo study health inequalities in persons with intellectual disabilities, representative and unbiased samples are needed. Little is known about sample recruitment in this vulnerable group. This study aimed to determine differences in ethical procedures and sample recruitment in a multicenter research on health of persons with intellectual disabilities. Study questions regarded the practical sampling procedure, how ethical consent was obtained in each country, and which person gave informed consent for each study participant.Study Design and SettingExploratory, as part of a multicenter study, in 14 European countries. After developing identical guidelines for all countries, partners collected data on health indicators by orally interviewing 1,269 persons with intellectual disabilities. Subsequently, semistructured interviews were carried out with partners and researchers.ResultsIdentification of sufficient study participants proved feasible. Sampling frames differed from nationally estimated proportions of persons with intellectual disabilities living with families or in residential settings. Sometimes, people with intellectual disabilities were hard to trace. Consent procedures and legal representation varied broadly. Nonresponse data proved unavailable.ConclusionTo build representative unbiased samples of vulnerable groups with limited academic capacities, international consensus on respectful consent procedures and tailored patient information is necessary.     

Ethical issues surrounding studies with vulnerable populations: a case study of South African street children

Researchers who investigate social and economic determinants of health often interact with vulnerable and marginalized populations. Great care must be taken to conduct research studies involving vulnerable persons in a manner consistent with accepted ethical principles in order to protect participants from exploitation, to build capacity, and to promote wellbeing. Children form a particularly vulnerable group, especially those who do not enjoy the protection of parents or guardians. METHODS: A research project which studied South African Sunnyside's street children was used as a case study to illustrate ethical issues surrounding research with vulnerable populations. DISCUSSION: The participants in the case study lacked the age of majority and were without any legal guardian. The researchers experienced considerable difficulty in obtaining ethical approval to conduct the study. The street children, at first, were not allowed to give informed consent for the study because of their minor age. Ethical principles of autonomy, disclosure, competence and understanding, consent and voluntariness, beneficence and non-maleficence, and justice are described and applied to this case study involving street children in a South African neighbourhood. It is suggested that by working within an ethical framework, the safety of research participants will be assured and the quality of the research will be enhanced.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Scientific research on human subjects and ethics procedures at the Istituto Superiore di Sanità: a survey of the articles issued in 2001

Principles promoting the protection of subjects involved in biomedical research are interpreted differently within the scientific community. The purpose of this paper is to describe the attitudes of researchers working at the Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) regarding the ethical implications of studies involving human beings, with particular emphasis on aspects concerning informed consent (IC) and ethics committee (EC) review. In 2001, ISS researchers published a total of 733 articles, 93 (12.7%) of which were studies involving human beings. Nearly 2/3 (60/93) were epidemiological, while the remaining 35.5% were based on laboratory data. Half (47/93) reported physical or psychological interventions or treatments on study subjects. 40.9% of articles mentioned that informed consent had been obtained and only 12.9% that approval had been given by an ethics committee. The low proportion of articles on which a protocol had been submitted the EC was due in part to the type of studies, but also to the absence of an institutional EC prior to 2001. Ethical procedures were more present in laboratory than in epidemiologic studies (IC: 69.7% vs 25.0%, p < 0.001) (EC: 27.3% vs 5.0% p = 0.004). Those differences were more likely due to the less interventionist nature of the epidemiologic studies rather than in poor ethical awareness on the part of epidemiologists. Further efforts are needed to develop and enforce clear institutional policies regarding ethical procedures.     

Tackling community concerns about commercialisation and genetic research: a modest interdisciplinary proposal

In recent years, there has been a rise in the creation of DNA databases promising a range of health benefits to individuals and populations. This development has been accompanied by an interest in, and concern for the ethical, legal and social aspects of such collections. In terms of policy solutions, much of the focus of these debates has been on issues of consent, confidentiality and research governance. However, there are broader concerns, such as those associated with commercialisation, which cannot be adequately addressed by these foci. In this article, we focus on the health-wealth benefits that DNA databases promise by considering the views of 10 focus groups on Generation Scotland, Scotland's first national genetic database. As in previous studies, our qualitative research on public/s and stakeholders' views of DNA databases show the prospect of utilising donated samples and information derived for wealth-related ends (i.e. for private profit), irrespective of whether there is an associated health-related benefit, arouses considerable reaction. While health-wealth benefits are not mutually exclusive ideals, the tendency has been to cast 'public' benefits as exclusively health-related, while 'private' commercial benefits for funders and/or researchers are held out as a necessary pay-off. We argue for a less polarised approach that reconsiders what is meant by 'public benefits' and questions the exclusivity of commercial interests. We believe accommodation can be achieved via the mobilisation of a grass roots solution known as 'benefit-sharing' or a 'profit pay-off'. We propose a sociologically informed model that has a pragmatic, legal framework, which responds seriously to public concerns.