Literature DB >> 31068107

Exploring Understanding of "Understanding": The Paradigm Case of Biobank Consent Comprehension.

Laura M Beskow1, Kevin P Weinfurt2.   

Abstract

Data documenting poor understanding among research participants and real-time efforts to assess comprehension in large-scale studies are focusing new attention on informed consent comprehension. Within the context of biobanking consent, we previously convened a multidisciplinary panel to reach consensus about what information must be understood for a prospective participant's consent to be considered valid. Subsequently, we presented them with data from another study showing that many U.S. adults would fail to comprehend the information the panel had deemed essential. When asked to evaluate the importance of the information again, panelists' opinions shifted dramatically in the direction of requiring that less information be understood. Follow-up interviews indicated significant uncertainty about defining a threshold of understanding and what should happen when prospective participants are unable to grasp key information. These findings have important implications for urgently needed discussion of whether consent comprehension is an ethical requirement or an ethical aspiration.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Informed consent; autonomy; biobanking; comprehension; research ethics; voluntariness

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31068107      PMCID: PMC6824537          DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1587031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Bioeth        ISSN: 1526-5161            Impact factor:   11.229


  30 in total

1.  What makes clinical research ethical?

Authors:  E J Emanuel; D Wendler; C Grady
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2000 May 24-31       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Improving informed consent: the medium is not the message.

Authors:  Patricia Agre; Frances A Campbell; Barbara D Goldman; Maria L Boccia; Nancy Kass; Laurence B McCullough; Jon F Merz; Suzanne M Miller; Jim Mintz; Bruce Rapkin; Jeremy Sugarman; James Sorenson; Donna Wirshing
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct

Review 3.  Bench to bedside: mapping the moral terrain of clinical research.

Authors:  Steven Joffe; Franklin G Miller
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2008 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.683

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

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

5.  Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  S Joffe; E F Cook; P D Cleary; J W Clark; J C Weeks
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-11-24       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Biobanking for research: a survey of patient population attitudes and understanding.

Authors:  Alanna Kulchak Rahm; Michelle Wrenn; Nikki M Carroll; Heather Spencer Feigelson
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-04-20

Review 7.  The ADAPTABLE Trial and Aspirin Dosing in Secondary Prevention for Patients with Coronary Artery Disease.

Authors:  Abigail Johnston; W Schuyler Jones; Adrian F Hernandez
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 2.931

8.  Assessing the understanding of biobank participants.

Authors:  K E Ormond; A L Cirino; I B Helenowski; R L Chisholm; W A Wolf
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.802

9.  Informed consent for biobanking: consensus-based guidelines for adequate comprehension.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Carrie B Dombeck; Cole P Thompson; J Kemp Watson-Ormond; Kevin P Weinfurt
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  Improving biobank consent comprehension: a national randomized survey to assess the effect of a simplified form and review/retest intervention.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Li Lin; Carrie B Dombeck; Emily Gao; Kevin P Weinfurt
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  11 in total

1.  Understanding as an Ethical Aspiration in an Era of Digital Technology-Based Communication: An Analysis of Informed Consent Functions.

Authors:  Stephanie A Kraft; Nanibaa' A Garrison; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 11.229

2.  Communicating With Diverse Patients About Participating in a Biobank: A Randomized Multisite Study Comparing Electronic and Face-to-Face Informed Consent Processes.

Authors:  Christian M Simon; Kai Wang; Laura A Shinkunas; Daniel T Stein; Paul Meissner; Maureen Smith; Rebecca Pentz; David W Klein
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 1.742

3.  The Meaning of Informed Consent: Genome Editing Clinical Trials for Sickle Cell Disease.

Authors:  Stacy Desine; Brittany M Hollister; Khadijah E Abdallah; Anitra Persaud; Sara Chandros Hull; Vence L Bonham
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2020-10-12

4.  Patient Preferences for Use of Archived Biospecimens from Oncology Trials When Adequacy of Informed Consent Is Unclear.

Authors:  Jeffrey Peppercorn; Eric Campbell; Steve Isakoff; Nora K Horick; Julia Rabin; Katharine Quain; Lecia V Sequist; Aditya Bardia; Deborah Collyar; Fay Hlubocky; Debra Mathews
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-09-06

5.  What Should We Be Asking of Informed Consent?

Authors:  Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.604

6.  Assessing the transparency of informed consent in feasibility and pilot studies: a single-centre quality assurance study protocol.

Authors:  Mohammed I Khan; Matthew Holek; Faris Bdair; Lawrence Mbuagbaw; Sandra M Eldridge; Claire L Chan; Michael J Campbell; Christine M Bond; Sally Hopewell; Gillian A Lancaster; Lehana Thabane
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-06-22       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Returning actionable genomic results in a research biobank: Analytic validity, clinical implementation, and resource utilization.

Authors:  Carrie L Blout Zawatsky; Nidhi Shah; Kalotina Machini; Emma Perez; Kurt D Christensen; Hana Zouk; Marcie Steeves; Christopher Koch; Melissa Uveges; Janelle Shea; Nina Gold; Joel Krier; Natalie Boutin; Lisa Mahanta; Heidi L Rehm; Scott T Weiss; Elizabeth W Karlson; Jordan W Smoller; Matthew S Lebo; Robert C Green
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Leveraging genomic diversity for discovery in an electronic health record linked biobank: the UCLA ATLAS Community Health Initiative.

Authors:  Ruth Johnson; Yi Ding; Vidhya Venkateswaran; Arjun Bhattacharya; Kristin Boulier; Alec Chiu; Sergey Knyazev; Tommer Schwarz; Malika Freund; Lingyu Zhan; Kathryn S Burch; Christa Caggiano; Brian Hill; Nadav Rakocz; Brunilda Balliu; Christopher T Denny; Jae Hoon Sul; Noah Zaitlen; Valerie A Arboleda; Eran Halperin; Sriram Sankararaman; Manish J Butte; Clara Lajonchere; Daniel H Geschwind; Bogdan Pasaniuc
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2022-09-09       Impact factor: 15.266

9.  Stakeholder perspectives on the ethico-legal dimensions of biobanking in South Africa.

Authors:  Shenuka Singh; Keymanthri Moodley
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 2.652

10.  Developing model biobanking consent language: what matters to prospective participants?

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Catherine M Hammack-Aviran; Kathleen M Brelsford
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 4.615

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.