Literature DB >> 11555076

How proxies make decisions about research for patients with Alzheimer's disease.

J Sugarman1, C Cain, R Wallace, K A Welsh-Bohmer.   

Abstract

We examined the proxy decision-making and informed consent processes for clinical research involving 49 patient-subjects with dementia in an outpatient setting by performing serial in-depth, structured, open-ended telephone interviews. Interviews were tape recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were then coded and analyzed. Although in all cases proxy consent was obtained for research from a legally authorized representative, proxies reported considerable ambiguity regarding who made the decision to participate in research, or to what degree the decision was that of the proxy or of the patient. Reasons proxies gave for participating in research included: hope of direct or indirect benefits to the patient, caregiver, or patient's descendents; desperation; trust in the investigator; belief in the goodness of research; and altruism. These reasons varied according to the type of research. For instance, in drug trials hope of direct benefit prevailed; in studies not evaluating a potential therapy more altruistic concerns predominated. Being a proxy decision maker for research can be burdensome. The degree of burden related to making a decision to participate in research seems influenced by a number of intersecting factors, most importantly, the risk and nature of the study, the extent to which patients were able to participate in the decision, and the duration and severity of dementia. Proxy decision-making concerning participation in research for patients with dementia can be a difficult task. The process might be improved by emphasizing that proxy consent is being sought because the nature of the patient's underlying medical condition can preclude the ability to make meaningful decisions. In addition, clinical researchers should recognize that giving proxy consent might place additional burdens on caregivers and discuss this explicitly when proxy consent is solicited.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11555076     DOI: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2001.49218.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc        ISSN: 0002-8614            Impact factor:   5.562


  16 in total

1.  Why substitute decision makers provide or decline consent for ICU research studies: a questionnaire study.

Authors:  Sangeeta Mehta; Friederike Quittnat Pelletier; Maedean Brown; Cheryl Ethier; David Wells; Lisa Burry; Rod MacDonald
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2011-11-26       Impact factor: 17.440

2.  Study partners perform essential tasks in dementia research and can experience burdens and benefits in this role.

Authors:  Betty S Black; Holly A Taylor; Peter V Rabins; Jason Karlawish
Journal:  Dementia (London)       Date:  2016-05-13

3.  "Thinking about it for somebody else": Alzheimer's disease research and proxy decision makers' translation of ethical principles into practice.

Authors:  Laura B Dunn; Stephanie Reyes Fisher; Melinda Hantke; Paul S Appelbaum; Daniel Dohan; Jenifer P Young; Laura Weiss Roberts
Journal:  Am J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 4.105

4.  Decision making for participation in dementia research.

Authors:  Betty S Black; Malory Wechsler; Linda Fogarty
Journal:  Am J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 4.105

5.  Clinical trials involving cats: what factors affect owner participation?

Authors:  Margaret E Gruen; Katrina N Jiamachello; Andrea Thomson; B Duncan X Lascelles
Journal:  J Feline Med Surg       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 2.015

Review 6.  Research ethics issues in geriatric psychiatry.

Authors:  Laura B Dunn; Sahana Misra
Journal:  Psychiatr Clin North Am       Date:  2009-06

7.  Informed consent, therapeutic misconception, and clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  James M Wilkins; Brent P Forester
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2020-01-26       Impact factor: 3.485

Review 8.  The U-ARE Protocol: A Pragmatic Approach to Decisional Capacity Assessment for Clinical Research.

Authors:  Rachel K B Hamilton; Cynthia H Phelan; Nathaniel A Chin; Mary F Wyman; Nickolas Lambrou; Nichelle Cobb; Amy J H Kind; Hanna Blazel; Sanjay Asthana; Carey E Gleason
Journal:  J Alzheimers Dis       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 4.472

9.  Ethical and Methodological Considerations for Evaluating Participant Views on Alzheimer's and Dementia Research.

Authors:  Clark Benson; Amanda Friz; Shannon Mullen; Laura Block; Andrea Gilmore-Bykovskyi
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2020-11-26       Impact factor: 1.742

10.  Addressing the challenges to successful recruitment and retention in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.

Authors:  Joshua D Grill; Jason Karlawish
Journal:  Alzheimers Res Ther       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 6.982

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.