Literature DB >> 16651328

Variation in standards of research compensation and child assent practices: a comparison of 69 institutional review board-approved informed permission and assent forms for 3 multicenter pediatric clinical trials.

Michael B Kimberly1, K Sarah Hoehn, Chris Feudtner, Robert M Nelson, Mark Schreiner.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To systematically compare standards for compensation and child participant assent in informed permission, assent, and consent forms (IP-A-CFs) approved by 55 local institutional review boards (IRBs) reviewing 3 standardized multicenter research protocols.
METHOD: Sixty-nine principal investigators participating in any of 3 national, multicenter clinical trials submitted standardized research protocols for their trials to their local IRBs for approval. Copies of the subsequently IRB-approved IP-A-CFs were then forwarded to an academic clinical research organization. This collection of IRB-approved forms allowed for a quasiexperimental retrospective evaluation of the variation in informed permission, assent, and consent standards operationalized by the local IRBs.
RESULTS: Standards for compensation and child participant assent varied substantially across 69 IRB-approved IP-A-CFs. Among the 48 IP-A-CFs offering compensation, monetary compensation was offered by 33 as reimbursement for travel, parking, or food expenses, whereas monetary or material compensation was offered by 22 for subject inconvenience and by 13 for subject time. Compensation ranged widely within and across studies (study 1, $180-1425; study 2, $0-500; and study 3, $0-100). Regarding child participant assent, among the 57 IP-A-CFs that included a form of assent documentation, 33 included a line for assent on the informed permission or consent form, whereas 35 included a separate form written in simplified language. Of the IP-A-CFs that stipulated the documentation of assent, 31 specified > or =1 age ranges for obtaining assent. Informed permission or consent forms were addressed either to parents or child participants.
CONCLUSION: In response to identical clinical trial protocols, local IRBs generate IP-A-CFs that vary considerably regarding compensation and child participant assent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16651328     DOI: 10.1542/peds.2005-1233

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  27 in total

1.  STI research: recruiting an unbiased sample.

Authors:  Jennifer L Reed; Julie M Thistlethwaite; Jill S Huppert
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2007-05-03       Impact factor: 5.012

2.  Centralized national ethical review of clinical trials in Croatia.

Authors:  Dinko Vitezić; Maja Lovrek; Sinisa Tomić
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.351

3.  Predictors of adolescent participation in sexually transmitted infection research: brief report.

Authors:  Jennifer L Reed; Jill S Huppert
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2008-04-11       Impact factor: 5.012

4.  Knowledge of regulations governing pediatric research: a pilot study.

Authors:  Annemarie Stroustrup; Susan Kornetsky; Steven Joffe
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2008 Sep-Oct

5.  Challenges to Studying Illicit Drug Users.

Authors:  Jennie E Ryan; Suzanne C Smeltzer; Nancy C Sharts-Hopko
Journal:  J Nurs Scholarsh       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 3.176

6.  Contrasting views of risk perception and influence of financial compensation between adolescent research participants and their parents.

Authors:  Lori Wiener; Adrienne Viola; Benjamin S Wilfond; David Wendler; Christine Grady
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2014-12-17       Impact factor: 1.742

Review 7.  Burdens on research imposed by institutional review boards: the state of the evidence and its implications for regulatory reform.

Authors:  George Silberman; Katherine L Kahn
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.911

8.  Effects of local institutional review board review on participation in national practice-based research network studies.

Authors:  Stacia A Finch; Shari L Barkin; Richard C Wasserman; Niramol Dhepyasuwan; Eric J Slora; Robert D Sege
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2009-12

9.  Enrolling pregnant women: issues in clinical research.

Authors:  Mary C Blehar; Catherine Spong; Christine Grady; Sara F Goldkind; Leyla Sahin; Janine A Clayton
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2013-01

10.  Hidden Empirical Research Ethics: A Review of Three Health Journals from 2005 through 2006.

Authors:  James M Dubois; Rebecca L Volpe; Erica K Rangel
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 1.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.