Emily F M Fitzpatrick1,2,3, Alexandra L C Martiniuk4,5,6, Heather D'Antoine7, June Oscar8,9, Maureen Carter10, Elizabeth J Elliott11,12,4,5. 1. Discipline of Paediatrics and Child Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. emilyfitzp@gmail.com. 2. The Sydney Children's Hospital Network (Westmead), 4 Governor Phillip Place, West Pennant Hills, Sydney, NSW, 2125, Australia. emilyfitzp@gmail.com. 3. Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. emilyfitzp@gmail.com. 4. Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 5. The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, Australia. 6. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 7. Menzies School of Health Research, Darwin, Australia. 8. Marninwarntikura Women's Resource Centre, Fitzroy Crossing, Australia. 9. Nulungu Research Institute, The University of Notre Dame, Broome, Australia. 10. Nindilingarri Cultural Health Services, Fitzroy Crossing, Australia. 11. Discipline of Paediatrics and Child Health, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 12. The Sydney Children's Hospital Network (Westmead), 4 Governor Phillip Place, West Pennant Hills, Sydney, NSW, 2125, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: When conducting research with Indigenous populations consent should be sought from both individual participants and the local community. We aimed to search and summarise the literature about methods for seeking consent for research with Indigenous populations. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted for articles that describe or evaluate the process of seeking informed consent for research with Indigenous participants. Guidelines for ethical research and for seeking consent with Indigenous people are also included in our review. RESULTS: Of 1447 articles found 1391 were excluded (duplicates, irrelevant, not in English); 56 were relevant and included. Articles were categorised into original research that evaluated the consent process (n = 5) or publications detailing the process of seeking consent (n = 13) and guidelines for ethical research (n = 38). Guidelines were categorised into international (n = 8); national (n = 20) and state/regional/local guidelines (n = 10). In five studies based in Australia, Canada and The United States of America the consent process with Indigenous people was objectively evaluated. In 13 other studies interpreters, voice recording, videos, pictures, flipcharts and "plain language" forms were used to assist in seeking consent but these processes were not evaluated. Some Indigenous organisations provide examples of community-designed resources for seeking consent and describe methods of community engagement, but none are evaluated. International, national and local ethical guidelines stress the importance of upholding Indigenous values but fail to specify methods for engaging communities or obtaining individual consent. In the 'Grey literature' concerns about the consent process are identified but no solutions are offered. CONCLUSION: Consultation with Indigenous communities is needed to determine how consent should be sought from the community and the individual, and how to evaluate this process.
BACKGROUND: When conducting research with Indigenous populations consent should be sought from both individual participants and the local community. We aimed to search and summarise the literature about methods for seeking consent for research with Indigenous populations. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted for articles that describe or evaluate the process of seeking informed consent for research with Indigenous participants. Guidelines for ethical research and for seeking consent with Indigenous people are also included in our review. RESULTS: Of 1447 articles found 1391 were excluded (duplicates, irrelevant, not in English); 56 were relevant and included. Articles were categorised into original research that evaluated the consent process (n = 5) or publications detailing the process of seeking consent (n = 13) and guidelines for ethical research (n = 38). Guidelines were categorised into international (n = 8); national (n = 20) and state/regional/local guidelines (n = 10). In five studies based in Australia, Canada and The United States of America the consent process with Indigenous people was objectively evaluated. In 13 other studies interpreters, voice recording, videos, pictures, flipcharts and "plain language" forms were used to assist in seeking consent but these processes were not evaluated. Some Indigenous organisations provide examples of community-designed resources for seeking consent and describe methods of community engagement, but none are evaluated. International, national and local ethical guidelines stress the importance of upholding Indigenous values but fail to specify methods for engaging communities or obtaining individual consent. In the 'Grey literature' concerns about the consent process are identified but no solutions are offered. CONCLUSION: Consultation with Indigenous communities is needed to determine how consent should be sought from the community and the individual, and how to evaluate this process.
Entities:
Keywords:
Aboriginal; Ethics; Indigenous; Informed consent; Oceanic ancestry group; Research
Authors: James P Fitzpatrick; Jane Latimer; Maureen Carter; June Oscar; Manuela L Ferreira; Heather Carmichael Olson; Barbara R Lucas; Robyn Doney; Claire Salter; Julianne Try; Genevieve Hawkes; Emily Fitzpatrick; Marmingee Hand; Rochelle E Watkins; Alexandra L C Martiniuk; Carol Bower; John Boulton; Elizabeth J Elliott Journal: J Paediatr Child Health Date: 2015-01-15 Impact factor: 1.954
Authors: Anna Harding; Barbara Harper; Dave Stone; Catherine O'Neill; Patricia Berger; Stuart Harris; Jamie Donatuto Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2011-09-02 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: James P Fitzpatrick; Elizabeth J Elliott; Jane Latimer; Maureen Carter; June Oscar; Manuela Ferreira; Heather Carmichael Olson; Barbara Lucas; Robyn Doney; Claire Salter; Elizabeth Peadon; Genevieve Hawkes; Marmingee Hand Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: David Moher; Larissa Shamseer; Mike Clarke; Davina Ghersi; Alessandro Liberati; Mark Petticrew; Paul Shekelle; Lesley A Stewart Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2015-01-01
Authors: Emily F M Fitzpatrick; Maureen Carter; June Oscar; Tom Lawford; Alexandra L C Martiniuk; Heather A D'Antoine; Elizabeth J Elliott Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-12-28 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: E F M Fitzpatrick; G Macdonald; A L C Martiniuk; H D'Antoine; J Oscar; M Carter; T Lawford; E J Elliott Journal: BMC Med Ethics Date: 2017-05-11 Impact factor: 2.652
Authors: Emily Fm Fitzpatrick; Gaynor Macdonald; Alexandra Lc Martiniuk; June Oscar; Heather D'Antoine; Maureen Carter; Tom Lawford; Elizabeth J Elliott Journal: BMC Med Ethics Date: 2019-01-29 Impact factor: 2.652
Authors: Anna H Balabanski; Angela Dos Santos; John A Woods; Amanda G Thrift; Timothy J Kleinig; Astrid Suchy-Dicey; Susanna Ragnhild Siri; Bernadette Boden-Albala; Rita Krishnamurthi; Valery L Feigin; Dedra Buchwald; Annemarei Ranta; Christina S Mienna; Carol Zavaleta; Leonid Churilov; Luke Burchill; Deborah Zion; W T Longstreth; David L Tirschwell; Sonia Anand; Mark W Parsons; Alex Brown; Donald K Warne; Matire Harwood; Judith M Katzenellenbogen Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-04-22 Impact factor: 4.003