Cargando…

Digitizing the Informed Consent Process: A Review of the Regulatory Landscape in the European Union

BACKGROUND: Rapid technological advancements are reshaping the conduct of clinical research. Electronic informed consent (eIC) is one of these novel advancements, allowing to interactively convey research-related information to participants and obtain their consent. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Sutter, Evelien, Meszaros, Janos, Borry, Pascal, Huys, Isabelle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9174519/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35692551
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.906448
_version_ 1784722252960366592
author De Sutter, Evelien
Meszaros, Janos
Borry, Pascal
Huys, Isabelle
author_facet De Sutter, Evelien
Meszaros, Janos
Borry, Pascal
Huys, Isabelle
author_sort De Sutter, Evelien
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Rapid technological advancements are reshaping the conduct of clinical research. Electronic informed consent (eIC) is one of these novel advancements, allowing to interactively convey research-related information to participants and obtain their consent. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of establishing a digital, long-distance relationship between research participants and researchers. However, the regulatory landscape in the European Union (EU) is diverse, posing a legal challenge to implement eIC in clinical research. Therefore, this study takes the necessary steps forward by providing an overview of the current regulatory framework in the EU, relevant to eIC. METHODS: We reviewed and analyzed the key EU regulations, such as the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR). We investigated the legality of eIC in several EU Member States, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. To this end, we contacted the medicines agencies of various countries to clarify the national requirements related to the implementation and use of eIC in clinical research. Our research was complemented by comparing the legal acceptance of eIC between the EU and the United States. RESULTS: In the EU, a distinction must be made between eIC for participation in clinical research and eIC for processing the participants’ personal data, complying respectively with requirements laid down by the CTR and the GDPR. On a national level, countries were classified into three groups: (1) countries accepting and regulating the use of eIC, (2) countries accepting the use of eIC without explicitly regulating it, and (3) countries not accepting the use of eIC. As a result, the regulation of eIC through laws and guidelines shows a large variety among EU Member States, while in the United States, it is harmonized through the Code of Federal Regulations. CONCLUSION: Various requirements must be considered when implementing eIC in clinical research. Nevertheless, requirements across the EU Member States may differ significantly, whereas, in the United States, efforts have already been made to achieve a harmonized approach.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9174519
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91745192022-06-09 Digitizing the Informed Consent Process: A Review of the Regulatory Landscape in the European Union De Sutter, Evelien Meszaros, Janos Borry, Pascal Huys, Isabelle Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine BACKGROUND: Rapid technological advancements are reshaping the conduct of clinical research. Electronic informed consent (eIC) is one of these novel advancements, allowing to interactively convey research-related information to participants and obtain their consent. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the importance of establishing a digital, long-distance relationship between research participants and researchers. However, the regulatory landscape in the European Union (EU) is diverse, posing a legal challenge to implement eIC in clinical research. Therefore, this study takes the necessary steps forward by providing an overview of the current regulatory framework in the EU, relevant to eIC. METHODS: We reviewed and analyzed the key EU regulations, such as the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR). We investigated the legality of eIC in several EU Member States, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. To this end, we contacted the medicines agencies of various countries to clarify the national requirements related to the implementation and use of eIC in clinical research. Our research was complemented by comparing the legal acceptance of eIC between the EU and the United States. RESULTS: In the EU, a distinction must be made between eIC for participation in clinical research and eIC for processing the participants’ personal data, complying respectively with requirements laid down by the CTR and the GDPR. On a national level, countries were classified into three groups: (1) countries accepting and regulating the use of eIC, (2) countries accepting the use of eIC without explicitly regulating it, and (3) countries not accepting the use of eIC. As a result, the regulation of eIC through laws and guidelines shows a large variety among EU Member States, while in the United States, it is harmonized through the Code of Federal Regulations. CONCLUSION: Various requirements must be considered when implementing eIC in clinical research. Nevertheless, requirements across the EU Member States may differ significantly, whereas, in the United States, efforts have already been made to achieve a harmonized approach. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9174519/ /pubmed/35692551 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.906448 Text en Copyright © 2022 De Sutter, Meszaros, Borry and Huys. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Medicine
De Sutter, Evelien
Meszaros, Janos
Borry, Pascal
Huys, Isabelle
Digitizing the Informed Consent Process: A Review of the Regulatory Landscape in the European Union
title Digitizing the Informed Consent Process: A Review of the Regulatory Landscape in the European Union
title_full Digitizing the Informed Consent Process: A Review of the Regulatory Landscape in the European Union
title_fullStr Digitizing the Informed Consent Process: A Review of the Regulatory Landscape in the European Union
title_full_unstemmed Digitizing the Informed Consent Process: A Review of the Regulatory Landscape in the European Union
title_short Digitizing the Informed Consent Process: A Review of the Regulatory Landscape in the European Union
title_sort digitizing the informed consent process: a review of the regulatory landscape in the european union
topic Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9174519/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35692551
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.906448
work_keys_str_mv AT desutterevelien digitizingtheinformedconsentprocessareviewoftheregulatorylandscapeintheeuropeanunion
AT meszarosjanos digitizingtheinformedconsentprocessareviewoftheregulatorylandscapeintheeuropeanunion
AT borrypascal digitizingtheinformedconsentprocessareviewoftheregulatorylandscapeintheeuropeanunion
AT huysisabelle digitizingtheinformedconsentprocessareviewoftheregulatorylandscapeintheeuropeanunion