Perception of the informed consent form by participants in clinical trials

To understand the perception of the participants in controlled clinical trials (CCTs) about the informed consent and describe the meaning of their participation in the research. Qualitative study using the focus group technique. The sample was composed of 19 patients who participated in clinical trials about hypertension and coronary disease in a specialized cardiologic hospital located in the city of Sao Paulo. The methodological framework used was the content analysis. Some of the participants were aware of the real objective of these studies while others had misperceptions. The reading of the informed consent is not always done and, when it is done, the patient does not understand it. The lack of understanding about the term ''placebo'' was mentioned by some participants. The motivation to participate was the personal benefit. This study shows that obtaining the informed consent in CCTs is complex and that there is the need to adapt the structure and application of this document, in order to protect the participants and improve the quality of clinical trials performed in the country.

Clinical trials, informed consent, & emergency medicine: A systematic literature review

Background: In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates clinical trials. These regulations address good clinical practices as well as human subject protection (FDA, 2012). One of the most important legal and ethical concerns in clinical trials is informed consent. 21 CFR 50 governs human subjects research. Part 50.24 provides an emergency research exception to the informed consent requirement. Research was conducted to determine the appropriateness of this exception, whether the benefit justifies the exception, and its public health significance.^ Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted and articles were identified from peer-reviewed journals.^ Results: There is some variance in opinions regarding the appropriateness of the exception, but the literature reviewed found the study results of these trials justified the waiver.^ Conclusion: The exception to the informed consent requirement is likely appropriate and justified in emergency research when implemented within the specified guidelines.^

Randomisation before consent : Avoiding delay to time-critical intervention and ensuring informed consent

Peer reviewed

Informed consent in clinical research: do patients understand what they have signed?

Informed consent is an essential element of research, and signing this document is required to conduct most clinical trials. Its aim is to inform patients what their participation in the study will involve. However, increasingly, their complexity and length are making them difficult to understand, which might lead patients to give their authorization without having read them previously or without having understood what is stated. In this sense, the Ethics Committees for Clinical Research, and Pharmacists specialized in Hospital Pharmacy and Primary Care in their capacity as members of said committees, play an important and difficult role in defending the rights of patients. These Committees will review thoroughly these documents to guarantee that all legal requirements have been met and, at the same time, that they are easy to understand by the potential participants in a clinical trial.

Informed, uninformed and participative consent in social media research

The use of online data is becoming increasingly essential for the generation of insight in today’s research environment. This reflects the much wider range of data available online and the key role that social media now plays in interpersonal communication. However, the process of gaining permission to use social media data for research purposes creates a number of significant issues when considering compatibility with professional ethics guidelines. This paper critically explores the application of existing informed consent policies to social media research and compares with the form of consent gained by the social networks themselves, which we label ‘uninformed consent’. We argue that, as currently constructed, informed consent carries assumptions about the nature of privacy that are not consistent with the way that consumers behave in an online environment. On the other hand, uninformed consent relies on asymmetric relationships that are unlikely to succeed in an environment based on co-creation of value. The paper highlights the ethical ambiguity created by current approaches for gaining customer consent, and proposes a new conceptual framework based on participative consent that allows for greater alignment between consumer privacy and ethical concerns.

Consent in Pharmacogenomic research

This article analyzes the emerging ethical and legal requirements for informed consent in pharmacogenomic research. It reviews how policies at the international, regional and national levels have responded to the ethical challenges raised by this new research area. It concludes that the pharmacogenomic policy framework is still in its infancy and needs to be further developed to answer the challenges raised by this important discipline.

The importance of a good relationship between patient/dentist based on the obtaining of an informed consenr to prevent lawsuits

The increased number of law suits in the Dentistry field constitutes an international trend. Patients well informed by the media and supported by the law sue their dentists, when they judge they were victim of bad practice. Professionals even with all discussion about this subject do not have the habit of prevent themselves. It is known that for a defensive practice the best way to avoid litigation is a good relationship with patient, based on dialog and on informed consent. This relation is very important, since patients who rely on their dentists rarely take them to justice. Hence, this article discusses the importance of this relation, as well as the obtaining of informed consent in order to prevent lawsuits.

Ethical procedures and patient consent differ in Europe.

BACKGROUND Research ethics approvals, procedures and requirements for institutional research ethics committees vary considerably by country and by type of organisation. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the requirements and procedures of research ethics committees, details of patient information and informed consent based on a multicentre European trial. DESIGN Survey of European hospitals participating in the prospective observational study on chronic postsurgical pain (euCPSP) using electronic questionnaires. SETTING Twenty-four hospitals in 11 European countries. PARTICIPANTS From the 24 hospitals, 23 local investigators responded; 23 answers were analysed. OUTCOME MEASURES Comparison of research ethics procedures and committee requirements from the perspective of clinical researchers. Comparison of the institutions' procedures regarding patient information and consent. Description of further details such as costs and the duration of the approval process. RESULTS The approval process lasted from less than 2 weeks up to more than 2 months with financial fees varying between 0 and 575 &OV0556;. In 20 hospitals, a patient information sheet of variable length (half page up to two pages) was provided. Requirements for patients' informed consent differed. Written informed consent was mandatory at 12, oral at 10 and no form of consent at one hospital. Details such as enough time for consideration, possibility for withdrawal and risks/benefits of participation were provided in 25 to 30% of the institutions. CONCLUSION There is a considerable variation in the administrative requirements for approval procedures by research ethics committees in Europe. This results in variation of the extent of information and consent procedures for the patients involved. TRIAL REGISTRATION euCPSP in Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01467102; PAIN-OUT in Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02083835.