The concept of vulnerability and the protection of human subjects of research

This article provides an overview of the concept of vulnerability through the lens of the U.S. federal regulations for the protection of human subjects of research. General issues that emerge for nurse researchers working with regulated vulnerable populations are identified. Points of current controversy in the application of the regulations and current discourse about vulnerable groups are highlighted. Suggestions for negotiating the tension between federally regulated human subject requirements and the realities of research with vulnerable subjects are given. The limitations of the designation of vulnerable as a protection for human subjects will also be discussed.

Initial psychometric evaluation of the Wayfinding Effectiveness Scale

This study evaluates three versions of the Wayfinding Effectiveness Scale (WES), developed to differentiate problems of wayfinding and wandering behavior of community-residing elders with dementia (EWD), in 266 dyads (EWD and caregiver) recruited from Alzheimer's Association chapters. Factor analyses yield a five-factor solution (explained variance = 62.6%): complex wayfinding goals, analytic strategies, global strategies, simple wayfinding goals, and being stimulus bound. Overall, internal consistencies are high: WES (.94-.95), and subscales are stable across all versions. Testretest reliability is acceptable for the overall WES and two subscales (complex and simple wayfinding goals) for the care recipient current behavior version. Construct validity is supported by the pattern of correlations among subscales and analyses of variance (ANOVAs) showing significant differences among the care recipient (current vs. prior behavior) and caregiver versions overall and for all subscales. Results support the WES as a valid and reliable measure of wayfinding effectiveness in persons with dementia.

Deliberative assessment of surrogate consent in dementia research

Background Research involving incapacitated persons with dementia entails complex scientific, legal, and ethical issues, making traditional surveys of layperson views on the ethics of such research challenging. We therefore assessed the impact of democratic deliberation (DD), involving balanced, detailed education and peer deliberation, on the views of those responsible for persons with dementia. Methods One hundred and seventy-eight community-recruited caregivers or primary decision-makers for persons with dementia were randomly assigned to either an all-day DD session group or a control group. Educational materials used for the DD session were vetted for balance and accuracy by an interdisciplinary advisory panel. We assessed the acceptability of family-surrogate consent for dementia research (“surrogate-based research”) from a societal policy perspective as well as from the more personal perspectives of deciding for a loved one or for oneself (surrogate and self-perspectives), assessed at baseline, immediately post-DD session, and 1 month after DD date, for four research scenarios of varying risk-benefit profiles. Results At baseline, a majority in both the DD and control groups supported a policy of family consent for dementia research in all research scenarios. The support for a policy of family consent for surrogate-based research increased in the DD group, but not in the control group. The change in the DD group was maintained 1 month later. In the DD group, there were transient changes in attitudes from surrogate or self-perspectives. In the control group, there were no changes from baseline in attitude toward surrogate consent from any perspective. Conclusions Intensive, balanced, and accurate education, along with peer deliberation provided by democratic deliberation, led to a sustained increase in support for a societal policy of family consent in dementia research among those responsible for dementia patients.

Double jeopardy : comorbid anxiety and depression in later life

Comorbid depression and anxiety in late life present challenges for geriatric mental health care providers. These challenges include identifying the often complex diagnostic presentations both clinically and in a research context. This potent comorbidity can be conceived as double jeopardy in older adults, further diminishing their quality of life. Geriatric health care providers need to understand psychiatric comorbidity of this type for accurate diagnosis and early referral to specialists, and to coordinate interdisciplinary care. Researchers in the field also need to recognize potential multiple impacts of comorbidities with respect to assessment and treatment domains. This article describes the prevalence of late-life depression and anxiety disorders and reviews studies on this comorbidity in older adults. Risk factors and protective factors for anxiety and depression in later life are reviewed, and information is provided about comparative symptoms, the selection of assessment tools, and challenges to the provision of interdisciplinary, evidence-based care.