Views of US researchers about informed consent in international collaborative research

被引:69
作者
Dawson, L [1 ]
Kass, NE
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Policy & Management, Baltimore, MD 21218 USA
[2] NIH, Kevric Corp, Off Biotechnol Act, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA
[3] Johns Hopkins Univ, Phoebe R Berman Bioeth Inst, Baltimore, MD 21218 USA
关键词
ethics; informed consent; developing countries; qualitative research; USA;
D O I
10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.02.004
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
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. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1211 / 1222
页数:12
相关论文
共 21 条
[1]   FALSE HOPES AND BEST DATA - CONSENT TO RESEARCH AND THE THERAPEUTIC MISCONCEPTION [J].
APPELBAUM, PS ;
ROTH, LH ;
LIDZ, CW ;
BENSON, P ;
WINSLADE, W .
HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 1987, 17 (02) :20-24
[2]   Reflections and recommendations on research ethics in developing countries [J].
Benatar, SR .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2002, 54 (07) :1131-1141
[3]   Human rights, politics, and reviews of research ethics [J].
Beyrer, C ;
Kass, NE .
LANCET, 2002, 360 (9328) :246-251
[4]   Informed consent in a clinical trial of a novel treatment for rheumatoid arthritis [J].
Criscione, LG ;
Sugarman, J ;
Sanders, L ;
Pisetsky, DS ;
St Clair, EW .
ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM-ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH, 2003, 49 (03) :361-367
[5]   Enhancing comprehension of consent for research in older patients with psychosis: A randomized study of a novel consent procedure [J].
Dunn, LB ;
Lindamer, LA ;
Palmer, BW ;
Schneiderman, LJ ;
Jeste, DV .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2001, 158 (11) :1911-1913
[6]  
Ekunwe E O, 1984, Hastings Cent Rep, V14, P22, DOI 10.2307/3561184
[7]  
Elbourne D, 1997, BRIT MED J, V315, P248
[8]   Random allocation or allocation at random? Patients' perspectives of participation in a randomised controlled trial [J].
Featherstone, K ;
Donovan, JL .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 317 (7167) :1177-1180
[9]  
Kass Nancy, 2003, IRB, V25, P1, DOI 10.2307/3563634
[10]  
King Nancy M. P., 1999, BEYOND REGULATIONS E