Literature DB >> 33734529

Distinctive aspects of consent in pilot and feasibility studies.

Julius Sim1.   

Abstract

Prior to a main randomized clinical trial, investigators often carry out a pilot or feasibility study in order to test certain trial processes or estimate key statistical parameters, so as to optimize the design of the main trial and/or determine whether it can feasibly be run. Pilot studies reflect the design of the intended main trial, whereas feasibility studies may not do so, and may not involve allocation to different treatments. Testing relative clinical effectiveness is not considered an appropriate aim of pilot or feasibility studies. However, consent is no less important than in a main trial as a means of morally legitimizing the investigator's actions. Two misperceptions are central to consent in clinical studies-therapeutic misconception (a tendency to conflate research and therapy) and therapeutic misestimation (a tendency to overestimate possible benefits and/or underestimate possible harms associated with participation). These phenomena may take a distinctive form in pilot and feasibility studies, owing to potential participants' likely prior unfamiliarity with the nature and purposes of such studies. Thus, participants may confuse the aims of a pilot or feasibility study (developing or optimizing trial design and processes) with those of a main trial (testing treatment effectiveness) and base consent on this misconstrual. Similarly, a misunderstanding of the ability of pilot and feasibility studies to provide information that will inform clinical care, or the underdeveloped nature of interventions included in such studies, may lead to inaccurate assessments of the objective possibility of benefit, and weaken the epistemic basis of consent accordingly. Equipoise may also be particularly challenging to grasp in the context of a pilot study. The consent process in pilot and feasibility studies requires a particular focus, and careful communication, if it is to carry the appropriate moral weight. There are corresponding implications for the process of ethical approval.
© 2021 The Author. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical trial; consent; ethics; feasibility study; pilot study

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33734529     DOI: 10.1111/jep.13556

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.431


  1 in total

1.  Humans, machines and decisions: Clinical reasoning in the age of artificial intelligence, evidence-based medicine and Covid-19.

Authors:  Michael Loughlin; Samantha Marie Copeland
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 2.431

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.