Literature DB >> 29679141

Ethical considerations of researchers conducting pediatric clinical drug trials: a qualitative survey in two Belgian university children's hospitals.

Wannes Van Hoof1, Kevin Meesters2,3, Lien Dossche4, Daphné Christiaens4, Pauline De Bruyne2, Johan Vande Walle4.   

Abstract

There is a general consensus about the underlying theoretical ethical principles that ground the practice of pediatric clinical trials: scientific necessity, good risk/benefit ratio, minimized burden, and parental consent/child assent. However, these principles are so broadly construed that it is not always clear how they should be applied in clinical practice. We conducted a qualitative study at Ghent University Hospital and the hospital of the Dutch-speaking university of Brussels on how researchers weigh ethical principles, assess the risk/benefit balance, estimate patient experience, and experience informed consent procedures in pediatric drug studies. Based on our assessment of the burden and risk versus benefit ratio in 62 pediatric drug research protocols, we selected 21 studies for further study to maximize diversity. Twenty-seven researchers (17 physicians, 10 study nurses) completed a qualitative survey about their study. We compared their responses to our assessments. The risk benefit assessment of our participants about their own research projects resembled our assessment almost perfectly. Assessing burden appeared to be more subjective. The researchers were confident in their ability to obtain valid consent. However, we question whether this confidence is warranted.
CONCLUSION: We argue for constant ethical reflexivity in pediatric clinical trials, because broad ethical principles are not always easy to apply to specific situations. What is Known: • Several international guidelines and a large body of scientific literature indicate a broad consensus about the basic ethical framework for pediatric clinical trials, based on risk benefit assessment and respect for autonomy. • Little is known about how researchers implement these broad principles in practice. What is New: • Researchers' risk/benefit assessments about their own studies resembled the assessment of neutral peers, assessing burden was more subjective. • Researchers were very confident in their ability to obtain valid informed consent.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical trials; Ethics; Informed consent; Pediatrics; Risk benefit assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29679141     DOI: 10.1007/s00431-018-3151-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Pediatr        ISSN: 0340-6199            Impact factor:   3.183


  11 in total

1.  Assessment of children's capacity to consent for research: a descriptive qualitative study of researchers' practices.

Authors:  Barbara E Gibson; Elaine Stasiulis; Shawna Gutfreund; Maria McDonald; Lauren Dade
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2011-06-02       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  Regulating trust in pediatric clinical trials.

Authors:  Wim Pinxten; Herman Nys; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2008-07-18

3.  How best to define the concept of minimal risk.

Authors:  Anna E Westra; Jan M Wit; Rám N Sukhai; Inez D de Beaufort
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2011-07-20       Impact factor: 4.406

Review 4.  Recruitment in pediatric clinical trials: an ethical perspective.

Authors:  Kourosh Afshar; Abhay Lodha; Adriana Costei; Nancy Vaneyke
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 5.  Therapeutic misconception: hope, trust and misconception in paediatric research.

Authors:  Simon Woods; Lynn E Hagger; Pauline McCormack
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2014-03

Review 6.  Ethical issues in neonatal and pediatric clinical trials.

Authors:  Naomi Laventhal; Beth A Tarini; John Lantos
Journal:  Pediatr Clin North Am       Date:  2012-08-26       Impact factor: 3.278

7.  How do institutional review boards apply the federal risk and benefit standards for pediatric research?

Authors:  Seema Shah; Amy Whittle; Benjamin Wilfond; Gary Gensler; David Wendler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-01-28       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Clarifying assent in pediatric research.

Authors:  Noor A A Giesbertz; Annelien L Bredenoord; Johannes J M van Delden
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Effect of child health status on parents' allowing children to participate in pediatric research.

Authors:  Jérémy Vanhelst; Ludovic Hardy; Dina Bert; Stéphane Duhem; Stéphanie Coopman; Christian Libersa; Dominique Deplanque; Frédéric Gottrand; Laurent Béghin
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 10.  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

View more
  2 in total

1.  Description of vaccine clinical trials in Africa: a narrative review.

Authors:  Duduzile Ndwandwe; Kopano Dube; Lindi Mathebula; Charles S Wiysonge
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2019-12-12       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Needs Assessment for Supports to Promote Pediatric Clinical Research Using an Online Survey of the Japanese Children's Hospitals Association.

Authors:  Osamu Nomura; Toru Kobayashi; Chie Nagata; Takeshi Kuriyama; Mayumi Sako; Kazuyuki Saito; Akira Ishiguro
Journal:  JMA J       Date:  2020-04-07
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.