Cargando…

The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research

BACKGROUND: Conducting clinical trials with pre-term or sick infants is important if care for this population is to be underpinned by sound evidence. Yet approaching parents at this difficult time raises challenges for the obtaining of valid informed consent to such research. This study asked: what...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilman, E., Megone, C., Oliver, S., Duley, L., Gyte, G., Wright, J. M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4634156/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26537492
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0957-x
_version_ 1782399302536003584
author Wilman, E.
Megone, C.
Oliver, S.
Duley, L.
Gyte, G.
Wright, J. M.
author_facet Wilman, E.
Megone, C.
Oliver, S.
Duley, L.
Gyte, G.
Wright, J. M.
author_sort Wilman, E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Conducting clinical trials with pre-term or sick infants is important if care for this population is to be underpinned by sound evidence. Yet approaching parents at this difficult time raises challenges for the obtaining of valid informed consent to such research. This study asked: what light does the empirical literature cast on an ethically defensible approach to the obtaining of informed consent in perinatal clinical trials? METHODS: A systematic search identified 49 studies. Analysis began by applying philosophical frameworks which were then refined in light of the concepts emerging from empirical studies to present a coherent picture of a broad literature. RESULTS: Between them, studies addressed the attitudes of both parents and clinicians concerning consent in neonatal trials; the validity of the consent process in the neonatal research context; and different possible methods of obtaining consent. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a variety of opinions among parents and clinicians there is a strongly and widely held view that it is important that parents do give or decline consent for neonatal participation in trials. However, none of the range of existing consent processes reviewed by the research is satisfactory. A significant gap is evaluation of the widespread practice of emergency ‘assent’, in which parents assent or refuse their baby’s participation as best they can during the emergency and later give full consent to ongoing participation and follow-up. Emergency assent has not been evaluated for its acceptability, how such a process would deal with bad outcomes such as neonatal death between assent and consent, or the extent to which late parental refusal might bias results. This review of a large number of empirical papers, while not making fundamental changes, has refined and developed the conceptual framework from philosophy for examining informed consent in this context. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0957-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4634156
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46341562015-11-06 The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research Wilman, E. Megone, C. Oliver, S. Duley, L. Gyte, G. Wright, J. M. Trials Research BACKGROUND: Conducting clinical trials with pre-term or sick infants is important if care for this population is to be underpinned by sound evidence. Yet approaching parents at this difficult time raises challenges for the obtaining of valid informed consent to such research. This study asked: what light does the empirical literature cast on an ethically defensible approach to the obtaining of informed consent in perinatal clinical trials? METHODS: A systematic search identified 49 studies. Analysis began by applying philosophical frameworks which were then refined in light of the concepts emerging from empirical studies to present a coherent picture of a broad literature. RESULTS: Between them, studies addressed the attitudes of both parents and clinicians concerning consent in neonatal trials; the validity of the consent process in the neonatal research context; and different possible methods of obtaining consent. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a variety of opinions among parents and clinicians there is a strongly and widely held view that it is important that parents do give or decline consent for neonatal participation in trials. However, none of the range of existing consent processes reviewed by the research is satisfactory. A significant gap is evaluation of the widespread practice of emergency ‘assent’, in which parents assent or refuse their baby’s participation as best they can during the emergency and later give full consent to ongoing participation and follow-up. Emergency assent has not been evaluated for its acceptability, how such a process would deal with bad outcomes such as neonatal death between assent and consent, or the extent to which late parental refusal might bias results. This review of a large number of empirical papers, while not making fundamental changes, has refined and developed the conceptual framework from philosophy for examining informed consent in this context. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0957-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4634156/ /pubmed/26537492 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0957-x Text en © Wilman et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Wilman, E.
Megone, C.
Oliver, S.
Duley, L.
Gyte, G.
Wright, J. M.
The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research
title The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research
title_full The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research
title_fullStr The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research
title_full_unstemmed The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research
title_short The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research
title_sort ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the empirical research
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4634156/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26537492
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0957-x
work_keys_str_mv AT wilmane theethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT megonec theethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT olivers theethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT duleyl theethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT gyteg theethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT wrightjm theethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT wilmane ethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT megonec ethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT olivers ethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT duleyl ethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT gyteg ethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch
AT wrightjm ethicalissuesregardingconsenttoclinicaltrialswithpretermorsickneonatesasystematicreviewframeworksynthesisoftheempiricalresearch