Literature DB >> 26374677

Use of altered informed consent in pragmatic clinical research.

Ross E McKinney1, Laura M Beskow2, Daniel E Ford3, John D Lantos4, Jonathan McCall2, Bray Patrick-Lake5, Mark J Pletcher6, Brian Rath7, Hollie Schmidt8, Kevin Weinfurt9.   

Abstract

There are situations in which the requirement to obtain conventional written informed consent can impose significant or even insurmountable barriers to conducting pragmatic clinical research, including some comparative effectiveness studies and cluster-randomized trials. Although certain federal regulations governing research in the United States (45 CFR 46) define circumstances in which any of the required elements may be waived, the same standards apply regardless of whether any single element is to be waived or whether consent is to be waived in its entirety. Using the same threshold for a partial or complete waiver limits the options available to institutional review boards as they seek to optimize a consent process. In this article, we argue that new standards are necessary in order to enable important pragmatic clinical research while at the same time protecting patients' rights and interests.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Common Rule; Informed consent; bioethics; clinical trial; cluster-randomized trial; institutional review board; practical clinical trial; pragmatic clinical research

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26374677      PMCID: PMC4688909          DOI: 10.1177/1740774515597688

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  21 in total

1.  Addressing low-risk comparative effectiveness research in proposed changes to US federal regulations governing research.

Authors:  Nancy Kass; Ruth Faden; Sean Tunis
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Considerations in the evaluation and determination of minimal risk in pragmatic clinical trials.

Authors:  John D Lantos; David Wendler; Edward Septimus; Sarita Wahba; Rosemary Madigan; Geraldine Bliss
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Quality improvement ethics: lessons from the SUPPORT study.

Authors:  Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 11.229

4.  There's a lot we don't know (and we ought to say so).

Authors:  Nancy M P King
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 11.229

5.  Understanding, interests and informed consent: a reply to Sreenivasan.

Authors:  Danielle Bromwich
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 2.903

6.  Variability among institutional review boards' decisions within the context of a multicenter trial.

Authors:  H Silverman; S C Hull; J Sugarman
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 7.598

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.  Exploring the ethical and regulatory issues in pragmatic clinical trials.

Authors:  Robert M Califf; Jeremy Sugarman
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.486

9.  Antenatal consent in the SUPPORT trial: challenges, costs, and representative enrollment.

Authors:  Wade D Rich; Kathy J Auten; Marie G Gantz; Ellen C Hale; Angelita M Hensman; Nancy S Newman; Neil N Finer
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2010-06-29       Impact factor: 7.124

10.  Variability in IRBs regarding parental acceptance of passive consent.

Authors:  Renee A Higgerson; Lauren E W Olsho; LeeAnn M Christie; Kyle Rehder; Teresa Doksum; Rainer Gedeit; John S Giuliano; Beth Brennan; Rachael Wendlandt; Adrienne G Randolph
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 7.124

View more
  38 in total

1.  Considerations in the evaluation and determination of minimal risk in pragmatic clinical trials.

Authors:  John D Lantos; David Wendler; Edward Septimus; Sarita Wahba; Rosemary Madigan; Geraldine Bliss
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.486

2.  The ethics and regulatory landscape of including vulnerable populations in pragmatic clinical trials.

Authors:  Mary Jane Welch; Rachel Lally; Jennifer E Miller; Stephanie Pittman; Lynda Brodsky; Arthur L Caplan; Gina Uhlenbrauck; Darcy M Louzao; James H Fischer; Benjamin Wilfond
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.486

Review 3.  Pragmatic Trials in Maintenance Dialysis: Perspectives from the Kidney Health Initiative.

Authors:  Laura M Dember; Patrick Archdeacon; Mahesh Krishnan; Eduardo Lacson; Shari M Ling; Prabir Roy-Chaudhury; Kimberly A Smith; Michael F Flessner
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2016-07-11       Impact factor: 10.121

4.  PRagmatic trial Of Video Education in Nursing homes: The design and rationale for a pragmatic cluster randomized trial in the nursing home setting.

Authors:  Vincent Mor; Angelo E Volandes; Roee Gutman; Constantine Gatsonis; Susan L Mitchell
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 2.486

5.  Physicians' perspectives regarding pragmatic clinical trials.

Authors:  Rachel Topazian; Juli Bollinger; Kevin P Weinfurt; Rachel Dvoskin; Debra Mathews; Kathleen Brelsford; Matthew DeCamp; Jeremy Sugarman
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 1.744

6.  Harmonization and streamlining of research oversight for pragmatic clinical trials.

Authors:  P Pearl O'Rourke; Judith Carrithers; Bray Patrick-Lake; Todd W Rice; Jeremy Corsmo; Raffaella Hart; Marc K Drezner; John D Lantos
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.486

7.  The Food and Drug Administration and pragmatic clinical trials of marketed medical products.

Authors:  Monique L Anderson; Joseph Griffin; Sara F Goldkind; Emily P Zeitler; Liz Wing; Sana M Al-Khatib; Rachel E Sherman
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.486

8.  Exploring the ethical and regulatory issues in pragmatic clinical trials.

Authors:  Robert M Califf; Jeremy Sugarman
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 2.486

9.  Understanding preferences regarding consent for pragmatic trials in acute care.

Authors:  Neal W Dickert; David Wendler; Chandan M Devireddy; Sara F Goldkind; Yi-An Ko; Candace D Speight; Scott Yh Kim
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2018-10-03       Impact factor: 2.486

10.  Where Did Informed Consent for Research Come From?

Authors:  Alexander Morgan Capron
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 1.718

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.