Literature DB >> 16264076

Communicating with communities about emergency research.

Lynne D Richardson1, Tammie E Quest, Steven Birnbaum.   

Abstract

The challenge of effectively communicating with communities about research is particularly salient for investigators who are conducting emergency research with an exception from informed consent. The authors discuss the ethical basis for the community consultation requirement and describe the nature and extent of the consultative process required to achieve these ethical purposes. The findings of the consensus conference are summarized as follows. 1) The requirements for community consultation and public disclosure for exception from informed consent studies serve important ethical purposes and should be retained. 2) Community consultation allows investigators and institutional review boards to obtain input from the community regarding planned research. The process serves to facilitate understanding, promote trust, ensure justice, and protect research participants. 3) Community consultation is a process that requires active participation by community members; however, it does not require their approval, consent, or consensus. The practical challenges involved in conducting meaningful community consultation are also discussed: defining the community and its appropriate representatives, methods to actively engage the community, the lack of uniformity among institutional review boards in required community consultation activities, and the lack of measures to evaluate the adequacy and appropriateness of community consultation. The recommendations of the consensus conference regarding future research about community consultation are summarized. Priorities include identifying best practices; defining effectiveness and developing measures to evaluate community consultation; evaluating alternative models and potential infrastructures to facilitate, conduct, and/or oversee effective community consultation processes; and developing educational modules for community members to empower their active participation in discussions about emergency research in their communities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16264076     DOI: 10.1197/j.aem.2005.06.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Emerg Med        ISSN: 1069-6563            Impact factor:   3.451


  12 in total

1.  Variation of community consultation and public disclosure for a pediatric multi-centered "Exception from Informed Consent" trial.

Authors:  Maija Holsti; Roger Zemek; Jill Baren; Rachel M Stanley; Prashant Mahajan; Cheryl Vance; Kathleen M Brown; Victor Gonzalez; Denise King; Kammy Jacobsen; Kate Shreve; Katrina van de Bruinhorst; Anne Marie Jones; James M Chamberlain
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 2.486

2.  A qualitative study of institutional review board members' experience reviewing research proposals using emergency exception from informed consent.

Authors:  Katie B McClure; Nicole M Delorio; Terri A Schmidt; Gary Chiodo; Paul Gorman
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Variations in the application of exception from informed consent in a multicenter clinical trial.

Authors:  Jestin N Carlson; Dana Zive; Denise Griffiths; Karen N Brown; Robert H Schmicker; Heather Herren; George Sopko; Sara DiFiore; Dixie Climer; Caroline Herdeman; Ahamed Idris; Graham Nichol; Henry E Wang
Journal:  Resuscitation       Date:  2018-12-17       Impact factor: 5.262

4.  Community consultation for prehospital research: experiences of study coordinators and principal investigators.

Authors:  Neal W Dickert; Prasanthi Govindarajan; Deneil Harney; Robert Silbergleit; Jeremy Sugarman; Kevin P Weinfurt; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  Prehosp Emerg Care       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 3.077

5.  A systematic review of Federal Drug Administration Docket for community consultation and public disclosure in exception from informed consent trials.

Authors:  Adrianne N Haggins; Deneil Harney; Sara Scott; Robert Silbergleit
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 2.486

6.  Exploring ethical conflicts in emergency trauma research: the COMBAT (Control of Major Bleeding after Trauma) study experience.

Authors:  Theresa L Chin; Ernest E Moore; Marilyn E Coors; James G Chandler; Arsen Ghasabyan; Jeffrey N Harr; John R Stringham; Christopher R Ramos; Sarah Ammons; Anirban Banerjee; Angela Sauaia
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 3.982

7.  Consulting communities when patients cannot consent: a multicenter study of community consultation for research in emergency settings.

Authors:  Neal W Dickert; Victoria A Mah; Michelle H Biros; Deneil M Harney; Robert Silbergleit; Jeremy Sugarman; Emir Veledar; Kevin P Weinfurt; David W Wright; Rebecca D Pentz
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 8.  Meeting unique requirements: Community consultation and public disclosure for research in emergency setting using exception from informed consent.

Authors:  Neal W Dickert; Kathleen Metz; Michael D Fetters; Adrianne N Haggins; Deneil K Harney; Candace D Speight; Robert Silbergleit
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 5.221

9.  Fifteen-minute consultation: an evidence-based approach to research without prior consent (deferred consent) in neonatal and paediatric critical care trials.

Authors:  Kerry Woolfall; Lucy Frith; Angus Dawson; Carrol Gamble; Mark D Lyttle; Bridget Young
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 1.309

Review 10.  Clinical research without consent in adults in the emergency setting: a review of patient and public views.

Authors:  Jan Lecouturier; Helen Rodgers; Gary A Ford; Tim Rapley; Lynne Stobbart; Stephen J Louw; Madeleine J Murtagh
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2008-04-29       Impact factor: 2.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.