Literature DB >> 10951919

Presumed consent in emergency neonatal research.

D J Manning1.   

Abstract

Current methods of obtaining consent for emergency neonatal research are flawed. They risk aggravating the distress of parents of preterm and other sick neonates. This distress, and the inevitable time constraints, compromise understanding and voluntariness, essential components of adequately informed consent. Current practice may be unjust in over-representing babies of more vulnerable and deprived parents. The research findings may thus not be generalisable. Informing parents antenatally about the possible need for emergency neonatal research, with presumed consent and scope for opting out, would address these problems. It would spare parents of sick neonates, already terrified by their baby's illness, further distress. Experience with opting out suggests that recruitment might increase, thus generating earlier results, without compromising parental understanding of the nature and purpose of the research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10951919      PMCID: PMC1733262          DOI: 10.1136/jme.26.4.249

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  23 in total

1.  Should Zelen pre-randomised consent designs be used in some neonatal trials?

Authors:  P Allmark
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  Informational needs of parents of sick neonates.

Authors:  N B Perlman; J L Freedman; R Abramovitch; H Whyte; H Kirpalani; M Perlman
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 7.124

3.  Conventional consent with opting in versus simplified consent with opting out: an exploratory trial for studies that do not increase patient risk.

Authors:  C G Rogers; J E Tyson; K A Kennedy; R S Broyles; J F Hickman
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.406

4.  Making sense of randomization; responses of parents of critically ill babies to random allocation of treatment in a clinical trial.

Authors:  C Snowdon; J Garcia; D Elbourne
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  Consent to clinical research--adequately voluntary or substantially influenced?

Authors:  S Hewlett
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 6.  Hypothermic neural rescue treatment: from laboratory to cotside?

Authors:  A D Edwards; D Azzopardi
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 5.747

7.  Informed consent in medical research. Consent is not always practical in emergency treatments.

Authors:  C Morley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1997-05-17

8.  Obtaining informed consent for neonatal randomised controlled trials--an "elaborate ritual"?

Authors:  S Mason
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 5.747

9.  Continuous negative extrathoracic pressure in neonatal respiratory failure.

Authors:  M P Samuels; J Raine; T Wright; J A Alexander; K Lockyer; S A Spencer; D S Brookfield; N Modi; D Harvey; C Bose; D P Southall
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 7.124

10.  Parental perceptions and attitudes about informed consent in clinical research involving children.

Authors:  S C Harth; Y H Thong
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 4.634

View more
  14 in total

Review 1.  Evidence based care.

Authors:  Peter Brocklehurst; William McGuire
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-01-01

2.  Effect of Needle Aspiration of Pneumothorax on Subsequent Chest Drain Insertion in Newborns: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Madeleine C Murphy; Christian Heiring; Nicoletta Doglioni; Daniele Trevisanuto; Mats Blennow; Kajsa Bohlin; Gianluca Lista; Ilaria Stucchi; Colm P F O'Donnell
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 16.193

3.  Mothers of babies enrolled in a randomized trial immediately after birth report a positive experience.

Authors:  D L Harris; P J Weston; J E Harding
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 2.521

4.  Antenatal consent in the SUPPORT trial: challenges, costs, and representative enrollment.

Authors:  Wade D Rich; Kathy J Auten; Marie G Gantz; Ellen C Hale; Angelita M Hensman; Nancy S Newman; Neil N Finer
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 5.  Consent for neonatal research.

Authors:  L McKechnie; A B Gill
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 5.747

6.  Parental preferences for neonatal resuscitation research consent: a pilot study.

Authors:  A Culbert; D J Davis
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.903

7.  Clinical trials of drugs used off-label in neonates: ethical issues and alternative study designs.

Authors:  Sanjiv B Amin; Michael P McDermott; Adil E Shamoo
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2008 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.622

8.  Informed consent in paediatric critical care research--a South African perspective.

Authors:  Brenda M Morrow; Andrew C Argent; Sharon Kling
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 2.652

9.  'The words will pass with the blowing wind': staff and parent views of the deferred consent process, with prior assent, used in an emergency fluids trial in two African hospitals.

Authors:  Sassy Molyneux; Maureen Njue; Mwanamvua Boga; Lilian Akello; Peter Olupot-Olupot; Charles Engoru; Sarah Kiguli; Kathryn Maitland
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  The ethical issues regarding consent to clinical trials with pre-term or sick neonates: a systematic review (framework synthesis) of the analytical (theoretical/philosophical) research.

Authors:  Christopher Megone; Eleanor Wilman; Sandy Oliver; Lelia Duley; Gill Gyte; Judy Wright
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2016-09-09       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.