Claire Ludwig1, Ian D Graham1,2,3, Josee Lavoie4, Wendy Gifford1, Dawn Stacey5,6. 1. University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, Roger Guindon Hall, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8M5, Canada. 2. University of Ottawa, Faculty of Medicine, School of Epidemiology and Public Health, 600 Peter Morand Crescent, Ottawa, K1G 5Z3, Ontario, Canada. 3. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada. 4. Geriatric Psychiatry Program, Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre, 1145 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1Z 7K4, Canada. 5. University of Ottawa, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Nursing, Roger Guindon Hall, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8M5, Canada. dstacey@uottawa.ca. 6. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Ontario, K1H 8L6, Canada. dstacey@uottawa.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The commitment to engage patients as partners in research has been described as a political, moral and ethical imperative. Researchers feel ill-equipped to deal with potential ethical implications of engaging patients as partners. The aim of this study is to identify the ethical considerations related to engaging frail and seriously ill (FSI) patients as partners in research. METHODS: We conducted a sub-analysis of a prior systematic review of 30 studies that engaged FSI patients as partners in research. Studies were included if they reported ethical considerations associated with partnering. We performed deductive content analysis, data were categorized according to Beauchamp and Childress' Principles of Biomedical Ethics (2019): autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included. Common ethical considerations reported in relation to the principles were: autonomy - promoting desired level of involvement, addressing relational and intellectual power, facilitating knowledge and understanding of research; non-maleficence - protection from financial burden, physical and emotional suffering; beneficence - putting things right for others, showing value-added, and supporting patient-partners; and, justice - achieving appropriate representation, mutual respect for contributions, and distributing risks and benefits. CONCLUSIONS: When partnering with FSI patients, research teams need to establish shared values and ensure processes are in place to identify and address ethical issues. Researchers and patients should work together to clarify the intent and outcomes of the partnership, actively address power differentials, recognize and minimize the potential for unintended harm, and strive to maximize the benefits of partnership. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The protocol for the original systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO (CRD42019127994).
BACKGROUND: The commitment to engage patients as partners in research has been described as a political, moral and ethical imperative. Researchers feel ill-equipped to deal with potential ethical implications of engaging patients as partners. The aim of this study is to identify the ethical considerations related to engaging frail and seriously ill (FSI) patients as partners in research. METHODS: We conducted a sub-analysis of a prior systematic review of 30 studies that engaged FSI patients as partners in research. Studies were included if they reported ethical considerations associated with partnering. We performed deductive content analysis, data were categorized according to Beauchamp and Childress' Principles of Biomedical Ethics (2019): autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included. Common ethical considerations reported in relation to the principles were: autonomy - promoting desired level of involvement, addressing relational and intellectual power, facilitating knowledge and understanding of research; non-maleficence - protection from financial burden, physical and emotional suffering; beneficence - putting things right for others, showing value-added, and supporting patient-partners; and, justice - achieving appropriate representation, mutual respect for contributions, and distributing risks and benefits. CONCLUSIONS: When partnering with FSI patients, research teams need to establish shared values and ensure processes are in place to identify and address ethical issues. Researchers and patients should work together to clarify the intent and outcomes of the partnership, actively address power differentials, recognize and minimize the potential for unintended harm, and strive to maximize the benefits of partnership. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The protocol for the original systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO (CRD42019127994).
Entities:
Keywords:
Ethics; Integrated knowledge translation; Patient engagement; Patient-partners; Public and patient involvement; Research co-production
Authors: Rachael Litherland; Julia Burton; Monica Cheeseman; Dianne Campbell; Maureen Hawkins; Tom Hawkins; Keith Oliver; David Scott; Jane Ward; Sharon M Nelis; Catherine Quinn; Christina Victor; Linda Clare Journal: Dementia (London) Date: 2018-11
Authors: Leah A Lechelt; Jana M Rieger; Katherine Cowan; Brock J Debenham; Bernie Krewski; Suresh Nayar; Akhila Regunathan; Hadi Seikaly; Ameeta E Singh; Andreas Laupacis Journal: Head Neck Date: 2017-11-17 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Elizabeth A Lynch; Coralie English; Emily R Ramage; Meredith Burke; Margaret Galloway; Ian D Graham; Heidi Janssen; Dianne L Marsden; Amanda J Patterson; Michael Pollack; Catherine M Said Journal: Health Res Policy Syst Date: 2022-01-03