Informed consent in clinical research: Consensus recommendations for reform identified by an expert interview panel

被引:26
作者
Lorell, Beverly H. [1 ]
Mikita, J. Stephen [2 ]
Anderson, Annick [3 ]
Hallinan, Zachary P. [3 ]
Forrest, Annemarie [4 ]
机构
[1] King & Spalding LLP, FDA & Life Sci Grp, Washington, DC 20006 USA
[2] Clin Trials Transformat Initiat, Salt Lake City, UT USA
[3] Ctr Informat & Study Clin Res Participat, Boston, MA USA
[4] Clin Trials Transformat Initiat, Durham, NC USA
关键词
Informed consent; institutional review board; research ethics; decision-making; clinical research; health policy; INTERVENTIONS;
D O I
10.1177/1740774515594362
中图分类号
R-3 [医学研究方法]; R3 [基础医学];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Background Informed consent is the cornerstone for protection of human subjects in clinical trials. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that reform of the informed consent process in the United States is needed. Methods The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative conducted interviews with 25 experienced observers of the informed consent process to identify limitations and actionable recommendations for change. Results There was broad consensus that current practices often fail to meet the ethical obligation to inform potential research participants during the informed consent process. The most frequent single recommendation, which would affect all participants in federally regulated clinical research, was reform of the informed consent document. The interviews also identified the need for reform of clinical research review by institutional review boards, including transitioning to a single institutional review board for multi-site trials. Conclusion The consensus recommendations from the interviewees provide a framework for meaningful change in the informed consent process. Although some proposed changes are feasible for rapid implementation, others such as substantive reform of the informed consent document may require change in federal regulations.
引用
收藏
页码:692 / 695
页数:4
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2011, FED REGISTER
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2012, How far have we come in reducing health disparities?: Progress since 2000-Workshop summary
[3]   Informed consent documents do not encourage good-quality decision making [J].
Brehaut, Jamie C. ;
Carroll, Kelly ;
Elwyn, Glyn ;
Saginur, Raphael ;
Kimmelman, Jonathan ;
Shojania, Kaveh ;
Syrowatka, Ania ;
Trang Nguyen ;
Hoe, Erica ;
Fergusson, Dean .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2012, 65 (07) :708-724
[4]  
Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI), INF CONS PROJ SUMM
[5]   Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research - A systematic review [J].
Flory, J ;
Emanuel, E .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2004, 292 (13) :1593-1601
[6]   Using Central IRBs for Multicenter Clinical Trials in the United States [J].
Flynn, Kathryn E. ;
Hahn, Cynthia L. ;
Kramer, Judith M. ;
Check, Devon K. ;
Dombeck, Carrie B. ;
Bang, Soo ;
Perlmutter, Jane ;
Khin-Maung-Gyi, Felix A. ;
Weinfurt, Kevin P. .
PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (01)
[7]  
Institute of Medicine (US) Forum on Drug Discovery Development and Translation, 2010, TRANSF CLIN RES US C
[8]  
Meade C D, 1999, Semin Oncol Nurs, V15, P124, DOI 10.1016/S0749-2081(99)80070-9
[9]  
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences National Institutes of Health, 2014, IRB REL NEW MOD ACC
[10]   Improving understanding in the research informed consent process: a systematic review of 54 interventions tested in randomized control trials [J].
Nishimura, Adam ;
Carey, Jantey ;
Erwin, Patricia J. ;
Tilburt, Jon C. ;
Murad, M. Hassan ;
McCormick, Jennifer B. .
BMC MEDICAL ETHICS, 2013, 14