Literature DB >> 8924437

Research consent by adolescent minors and institutional review boards.

K A Mammel1, D W Kaplan.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A national survey of institutional review boards (IRBs) was conducted to determine: (1) the current practices of IRBs concerning consent for adolescent minors; and (2) the existence of support for changes in the federal regulations for research on adolescents.
METHODS: Six hundred surveys were mailed in two waves to all IRB chairs in the United States, with the exception of highly specialized institutions. The survey consisted of three sections. Section 1 assessed demographic data, such as institution type; presence of personnel trained in adolescent health; and number of protocols involving adolescents reviewed annually. Section 2 presented a series of twelve scenarios for which respondents stated whether their IRB would waive parental consent under present federal regulations. These scenarios varied the sensitivity of information and procedural invasiveness, and ranged from simple satisfaction surveys to experimental drug treatment for AIDS. Section 3 assessed whether respondents would recommend changes in current federal regulations that would enable adolescent minors to provide their own consent to research participation. To this end, respondents indicated whether minor consent alone is sufficient or if parental consent should be required for 10 general research categories that paralleled the level of invasiveness of the scenarios presented in Section 2.
RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty-three surveys (39%) were returned and 183 (30%) were fully scorable. Within group comparisons for IRBs were conducted using Chi-square statistics. Seventy percent of respondent IRBs required parental consent for all research on minors, and IRBs reviewing more than 10 adolescent protocols per year were less likely to require parental consent (p < .01). Responses did not differ by institution type or presence of personnel trained in adolescent health. Fifty-two percent of respondent IRBs required parental consent for a simple satisfaction survey, and only 29% of IRBs would waive parental consent for an anonymous HIV seroprevalence study. Over one-half of IRBs supported changes in regulations that would enable minors to provide informed self-consent for seven of 10 general research categories: anonymous surveys (supported by 93%), research involving sensitive material if nothing more than survey (89%) or venipuncture (53%) were involved, and research on diseases for which minors may consent to treatment including survey (93%), venipuncture (68%), or medication approved for use in pediatric patients (57%).
CONCLUSION: Even though IRBs practice under the same federal regulations there is a broad spectrum of interpretation. Considerable support exists for changing the guidelines for certain categories of research involving adolescents. Federal regulations need to be clarified for meaningful and necessary research on adolescents to take place.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8924437     DOI: 10.1016/1054-139x(95)00176-s

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Adolesc Health        ISSN: 1054-139X            Impact factor:   5.012


  16 in total

1.  Legal Barriers to Adolescent Participation in Research About HIV and Other Sexually Transmitted Infections.

Authors:  Quianta L Moore; Mary E Paul; Amy L McGuire; Mary A Majumder
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Strategies for conducting adolescent health research in the clinical setting: the Mount Sinai Adolescent Health Center HPV experience.

Authors:  Debra K Braun-Courville; Nicolas F Schlecht; Robert D Burk; Howard D Strickler; Mary Rojas; Elizabeth Lorde-Rollins; Anne Nucci-Sack; Dominic Hollman; L Oriana Linares; Angela Diaz
Journal:  J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 1.814

3.  Comparisons of adolescent and parent willingness to participate in minimal and above-minimal risk pediatric asthma research protocols.

Authors:  Janet L Brody; Robert D Annett; David G Scherer; Mandy L Perryman; Keely M W Cofrin
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 5.012

Review 4.  Practice brief: adolescents and HIV clinical trials: ethics, culture, and context.

Authors:  Kathleen M MacQueen; Quarraisha Abdool Karim
Journal:  J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.354

5.  STI research: recruiting an unbiased sample.

Authors:  Jennifer L Reed; Julie M Thistlethwaite; Jill S Huppert
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2007-05-03       Impact factor: 5.012

6.  Predictors of adolescent participation in sexually transmitted infection research: brief report.

Authors:  Jennifer L Reed; Jill S Huppert
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2008-04-11       Impact factor: 5.012

7.  Knowledge of regulations governing pediatric research: a pilot study.

Authors:  Annemarie Stroustrup; Susan Kornetsky; Steven Joffe
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2008 Sep-Oct

8.  Adolescent Sexual Behavior Research: Perspectives of Investigators, IRB Members, and IRB Staff about Risk Categorization and IRB Approval.

Authors:  Kyle A McGregor; Devon J Hensel; Amy C Waltz; Elizabeth Molnar; Mary A Ott
Journal:  IRB       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug

9.  Evaluating Active Parental Consent Procedures for School Programming: Addressing the Sensitive Topic of Suicide Prevention.

Authors:  Christine M Wienke Totura; Krista Kutash; Christa D Labouliere; Marc S Karver
Journal:  J Sch Health       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 2.118

10.  Guidelines and Recommendations for Training Ethical Alcohol Researchers.

Authors:  Christal N Davis
Journal:  Train Educ Prof Psychol       Date:  2020-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.