Literature DB >> 22875981

Supporting positive experiences and sustained participation in clinical trials: looking beyond information provision.

Kate Gillies1, Vikki A Entwistle.   

Abstract

Recruitment processes for clinical trials are governed by guidelines and regulatory systems intended to ensure participation is informed and voluntary. Although the guidelines and systems provide some protection to potential participants, current recruitment processes often result in limited understanding and experiences of inadequate decision support. Many trials also have high drop-out rates among participants, which are ethically troubling because they can be indicative of poor experiences and they limit the usefulness of the knowledge the trials were designed to generate. Drawing on recent social-psychological and philosophical-ethical research on trial recruitment and patient participation in treatment decision-making, this paper identifies possibilities for improving communicative support for both initial decisions and ongoing participation in clinical trials. It highlights the potential of a shift in thinking about 'voluntariness', underpinned by relational understandings of autonomy, to encourage more nuanced judgements about the ethics of communication between trial staff and (potential) participants. The paper suggests that the idea of responsively enabling people to consider invitations or requests to participate in particular trials could serve as a general guide to communication. This might help ensure decisions about trial participation are meaningfully informed and voluntary, and that relationships between trial staff and participants contribute to positive experiences of trial participation and ultimately to the generation of the robust knowledge.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22875981     DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100059

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


  23 in total

1.  Improving informed consent: Stakeholder views.

Authors:  Emily E Anderson; Susan B Newman; Alicia K Matthews
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2017-08-02

2.  Minors' and Young Adults' Experiences of the Research Consent Process in a Phase II Safety Study of Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for HIV.

Authors:  Amelia S Knopf; Mary A Ott; Nancy Liu; Bill G Kapogiannis; Gregory D Zimet; J Dennis Fortenberry; Sybil G Hosek
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2017-09-28       Impact factor: 5.012

Review 3.  Strengths and weaknesses of guideline approaches to safeguard voluntary informed consent of patients within a dependent relationship.

Authors:  Sara A S Dekking; Rieke van der Graaf; Johannes J M van Delden
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2014-03-24       Impact factor: 8.775

4.  Decision aids for randomised controlled trials: a qualitative exploration of stakeholders' views.

Authors:  Katie Gillies; Zoë C Skea; Marion K Campbell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 5.  Interventions to improve recruitment and retention in clinical trials: a survey and workshop to assess current practice and future priorities.

Authors:  Peter Bower; Valerie Brueton; Carrol Gamble; Shaun Treweek; Catrin Tudur Smith; Bridget Young; Paula Williamson
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 6.  Decision aids for people considering taking part in clinical trials.

Authors:  Katie Gillies; Seonaidh C Cotton; Jamie C Brehaut; Mary C Politi; Zoe Skea
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-11-27

7.  Parents' agendas in paediatric clinical trial recruitment are different from researchers' and often remain unvoiced: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Kerry Woolfall; Valerie Shilling; Helen Hickey; Rosalind L Smyth; Emma Sowden; Paula R Williamson; Bridget Young
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  How parents and practitioners experience research without prior consent (deferred consent) for emergency research involving children with life threatening conditions: a mixed method study.

Authors:  Kerry Woolfall; Lucy Frith; Carrol Gamble; Ruth Gilbert; Quen Mok; Bridget Young
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Doing challenging research studies in a patient-centred way: a qualitative study to inform a randomised controlled trial in the paediatric emergency care setting.

Authors:  Kerry Woolfall; Bridget Young; Lucy Frith; Richard Appleton; Anand Iyer; Shrouk Messahel; Helen Hickey; Carrol Gamble
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Patient information leaflets (PILs) for UK randomised controlled trials: a feasibility study exploring whether they contain information to support decision making about trial participation.

Authors:  Katie Gillies; Wan Huang; Zoë Skea; Jamie Brehaut; Seonaidh Cotton
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.