Literature DB >> 25317644

Accuracy of the MacArthur competence assessment tool for clinical research (MacCAT-CR) for measuring children's competence to consent to clinical research.

Irma M Hein1, Pieter W Troost1, Robert Lindeboom2, Marc A Benninga3, C Michel Zwaan4, Johannes B van Goudoever5, Ramón J L Lindauer1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: An objective assessment of children's competence to consent to research participation is currently not possible. Age limits for asking children's consent vary considerably between countries, and, to our knowledge, the correlation between competence and children's age has never been systematically investigated.
OBJECTIVES: To test a standardized competence assessment instrument for children by modifying the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR), to investigate its reliability and validity, and to examine the correlation of its assessment with age and estimate cutoff ages. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prospective study included children and adolescents aged 6 to 18 years in the inpatient and outpatient departments of allergology, gastroenterology, oncology, ophthalmology, and pulmonology from January 1, 2012, through January 1, 2014. Participants were eligible for clinical research studies, including observational studies and randomized clinical trials. EXPOSURES: Competence judgments by experts aware of the 4 relevant criteria-understanding, appreciation, reasoning, and choice-were used to establish the reference standard. The index test was the MacCAT-CR, which used a semistructured interview format. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Interrater reliability, validity, and dimensionality of the MacCAT-CR and estimated cutoff ages for competence.
RESULTS: Of 209 eligible patients, we included 161 (mean age, 10.6 years; 47.2% male). Good reproducibility of MacCAT-CR total and subscale scores was observed (intraclass correlation coefficient range, 0.68-0.92). We confirmed unidimensionality of the MacCAT-CR. By the reference standard, we judged 54 children (33.5%) to be incompetent; by the MacCAT-CR, 61 children (37.9%). Criterion-related validity of MacCAT-CR scores was supported by high overall accuracy in correctly classifying children as competent against the reference standard (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, 0.78). Age was a good predictor of competence on the MacCAT-CR (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, 0.90). In children younger than 9.6 years, competence was unlikely (sensitivity, 90%); in those older than 11.2 years, competence was probable (specificity, 90%). The optimal cutoff age was 10.4 years (sensitivity, 81%; specificity, 84%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The MacCAT-CR demonstrated strong psychometric properties. In children aged 9.6 to 11.2 years, consent may be justified when competence can be demonstrated in individual cases by the MacCAT-CR. The results contribute to a scientific underpinning of regulations for clinical research directed toward children.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25317644     DOI: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2014.1694

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Pediatr        ISSN: 2168-6203            Impact factor:   16.193


  34 in total

1.  The challenges of research participation by children.

Authors:  Frank H Bloomfield
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 3.756

2.  A cognitive approach for design of a multimedia informed consent video and website in pediatric research.

Authors:  Holly Antal; H Timothy Bunnell; Suzanne M McCahan; Chris Pennington; Tim Wysocki; Kathryn V Blake
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 6.317

3.  Using digital multimedia to improve parents' and children's understanding of clinical trials.

Authors:  Alan R Tait; Terri Voepel-Lewis; Robert Levine
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 3.791

4.  Why do children decide not to participate in clinical research: a quantitative and qualitative study.

Authors:  Irma M Hein; Pieter W Troost; Martine C de Vries; Catherijne A J Knibbe; Johannes B van Goudoever; Ramón J L Lindauer
Journal:  Pediatr Res       Date:  2015-04-09       Impact factor: 3.756

5.  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 6.  Transition of Children with Neurological Disorders.

Authors:  Ann H Tilton
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2018-03-10       Impact factor: 5.081

Review 7.  Informed consent in pediatric research.

Authors:  Tom Leibson; Gideon Koren
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.022

8.  Is decision-making capacity an "essentially contested" concept in pediatrics?

Authors:  Eva De Clercq; Katharina Ruhe; Michel Rost; Bernice Elger
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2017-09

9.  Inclusion of Adolescents in Clinical Trials for Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Review of Existing Registered Studies.

Authors:  Lily F Hoffman; Neferterneken K Francis; Marina Catallozzi; Jenny K R Francis; Lawrence R Stanberry; Susan L Rosenthal
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2016-03-12       Impact factor: 5.012

10.  Banking the Future: Adolescent Capacity to Consent to Biobank Research.

Authors:  Kyle A McGregor; Mary A Ott
Journal:  Ethics Hum Res       Date:  2019-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.