Context-Relative Norms Determine the Appropriate Type of Consent in Clinical Biobanks: Towards a Potential Solution for the Discrepancy between the General Data Protection Regulation and the European Data Protection Board on Requirements for Consent

Context-Relative Norms Determine the Appropriate Type of Consent in Clinical Biobanks: Towards a Potential Solution for the Discrepancy between the General Data Protection Regulation and the European Data Protection Board on Requirements for Consent
Original Research/Scholarship
Indrakusuma, S. Kalkman, M. J. W. Koelemay, R. Balm & D. L. Willems
Science and Engineering Ethics, 13 October 2020
Open Access
Abstract
Clinical biobanks processing data of participants in the European Union (EU) fall under the scope of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which among others includes requirements for consent. These requirements are further specified by the Article 29 Working Party (WP29)—an EU advisory body currently known as the European Data Protection Board (EDPB). Unfortunately, their guidance is cause for some confusion. While the GDPR allows participants to give broad consent for research when specific research purposes are still unknown, the WP29 guidelines suggest that additional consent for specific uses should be obtained in addition to broad consent when this becomes applicable. This discrepancy elicits the question whether clinical biobanks can fail the requirement of consent if they obtain broad consent, but not a specific consent for each biomedical study. We analysed this discrepancy within the framework of contextual integrity, in order to describe the context-relative informational norms that govern information flows in clinical biobanks. However, our analysis demonstrates that there is no uniform set of norms that can be applied to all clinical biobanks. As such, neither the GDPR nor the WP29 guidance can act as a “one size fits all” approach to all clinical biobanks. Rather, differences between clinical biobanks—especially regarding the scientific aims and patient populations—make the case for context-relative norms that determine the appropriate type of consent.

Informed consent procedures for emergency interventional research in patients with traumatic brain injury and ischaemic stroke

Informed consent procedures for emergency interventional research in patients with traumatic brain injury and ischaemic stroke
Personal View
Erwin J O Kompanje, Jeroen T J M van Dijck, Vicky Chalos, Sophie A van den Berg, Paula M Janssen, Paul J Nederkoorn, Mathie uvan der Jagt, Giuseppe Citerio, Nino Stocchetti, Diederik W J Dippel, Wilco C Peul
The Lancet Neurology, 21 October 2020
Summary
Health-care professionals and researchers have a legal and ethical responsibility to inform patients before carrying out diagnostic tests or treatment interventions as part of a clinical study. Interventional research in emergency situations can involve patients with some degree of acute cognitive impairment, as is regularly the case in traumatic brain injury and ischaemic stroke. These patients or their proxies are often unable to provide informed consent within narrow therapeutic time windows. International regulations and national laws are criticised for being inconclusive or restrictive in providing solutions. Currently accepted consent alternatives are deferred consent, exception from consent, or waiver of consent. However, these alternatives appear under-utilised despite being ethically permissible, socially acceptable, and regulatorily compliant. We anticipate that, when the requirements for medical urgency are properly balanced with legal and ethical conduct, the increased use of these alternatives has the potential to improve the efficiency and quality of future emergency interventional studies in patients with an inability to provide informed consent.

The Attitudes of Relatives of ICU Patients toward Informed Consent for Clinical Research

The Attitudes of Relatives of ICU Patients toward Informed Consent for Clinical Research
Research Article
Rania Mahafzah, Karem H. Alzoubi, Omar F. Khabour
Critical Care Research and Practice, 9 October 2020
Open Access
Abstract
Background
Informed consent is a key ethical requirement for biomedical research that is implemented to ensure autonomy and voluntary participation. However, patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) may be unconscious or severely ill and thus lack the capacity for decisions about research participation. Thus, relatives or guardians are usually asked to provide informed consent prior to the inclusion of ICU patients in research.
Aims
This study aimed to assess the attitudes and preferences of relatives of ICU patients toward informed consent in biomedical research in Jordan.
Subjects and Methods
A sample of 184 relatives with a critically ill next of kin in the ICU was anonymously surveyed regarding their attitudes and preferences toward giving informed consent for biomedical research on behalf of their patients.
Results
The study showed that the majority of relatives had a positive attitude toward the informed consent process on behalf of their patients in the ICU (72.3%). The perception that participation in research would be directly beneficial to their patient was the most significant reason to provide informed consent among relatives. The degree of relatedness to the patient was significantly associated with the decision to provide informed consent on behalf of the patients in the ICU. Additionally, more than 70% of the relatives strongly agreed to take part in clinical research if they were to be unconscious patients in the ICU. Moreover, the majority of the respondents agreed that their first-degree relatives would give consent on their behalf.
Conclusion
Relatives with a critically ill next of kin in the ICU had positive attitudes toward providing informed consent on behalf of their patients. This was motivated by the direct benefit from the research to their patient.

Family perceptions of clinical research and the informed consent process in the ICU

Family perceptions of clinical research and the informed consent process in the ICU
Short Communication
Marie Labruyère, Nicolas Meunier-Beillard, Fiona Ecarnot, Audrey Large, François Aptel, Jean-Baptiste Roudaut, Pascal Andreu, Auguste Dargent, Jean-Philippe Rigaud, Jean-Pierre Quenot
Journal of Critical Care, 28 September 2020
Abstract
Purpose
We investigated experiences of families who provide consent for research on behalf of a loved-one hospitalized in intensive care (ICU).
Methods
Multicentre, qualitative, descriptive study using semi-directive interviews in 3 ICUs. Eligible relatives were aged >18 years, and had provided informed consent for a clinical trial on behalf of a patient hospitalized in ICU. Interviews were conducted from 06/2018 to 06/2019 by a qualified sociologist, recorded and transcribed.
Results
Fifteen relatives were interviewed; average age 50.3 ± 15 years. All emphasized their interest in clinical research, seeing it as a duty. Involving their loved-one in research allowed them to find meaning in the events. Participants underlined that trust in caregivers and communication are determinant. The strict regulation of research was perceived as a guarantee of safety. Participants felt they lacked the intellectual capacity and knowledge to question explanations. The greatest fear was not that they might incur a risk for the patient, but rather, that they might deprive the patient of a chance at a cure.
Conclusion
Acceptance of research opportunities by relatives on behalf of decisionally-incapacitated patients is underpinned by trust in the physicians and the legislative framework. Communication and the quality of information provided by the caregivers are key.

Caregiver Perspectives on Informed Consent for a Pediatric Learning Healthcare System Model of Care

Caregiver Perspectives on Informed Consent for a Pediatric Learning Healthcare System Model of Care
Research Article
E. Pritchard, T. A. Zabel, L. A. Jacobson, E. Jones, C. Holingue, L. G. Kalb
AJOB Empirical Bioethics, 26 October 2020
Abstract
Background
Data is needed to provide insight into the issue of preference around consent for use of pediatric clinical data for research. This study evaluated caregivers’ preferences concerning use of their child’s clinical information.
Methods
Caregivers of children (n = 101; response rate 81.5% of n = 124) presenting for psychological evaluation at an urban medical center viewed a video regarding how the information contained in their child’s medical record could be used for research.
Results
An anonymous survey following the video indicated that: 1) >90% of caregivers felt comfortable with their child’s information being used; 2) >90% of caregivers felt their child’s privacy would be adequately protected; 3) 98% of caregivers reported themselves to be as or more likely to return to the institution after viewing the video; 4) 60% of caregivers felt no additional consent procedures beyond viewing the video were needed, while 20% preferred an opt-out and 20% preferred a traditional consent procedure. Caregiver demographic variables were largely unrelated to consent preferences.
Discussion
Overall, caregivers reported strong support for use of their child’s clinical data for research purposes.

Issues of consent and assent in pediatric neurosurgery

Issues of consent and assent in pediatric neurosurgery
Review Article
Rajeev D. Sen, Amy Lee, Samuel R. Browd, Richard G. Ellenbogen, Jason S. Hauptman
Child’s Nervous System, 17 October 2020
Abstract
Background
Consent and assent are important concepts to understand in the care of pediatric neurosurgery patients. Recently it has been recommended that although pediatric patients generally do not have the legal capacity to make medical decisions, they be encouraged to be involved in their own care. Given the paucity of information on this topic in the neurosurgery community, the objective is to provide pediatric neurosurgeons with recommendations on how to involve their patients in medical decision-making.
Methods
We review the essential elements and current guidelines of consent and assent for pediatric patients using illustrative neurosurgical case vignettes.
Results
The pediatric population ranges widely in cognitive and psychological development making the process of consent and assent quite complex. The role of the child or adolescent in medical decision-making, issues associated with obtaining assent or dissent, and informed refusal of treatment are considered.
Conclusion
The process of obtaining consent and assent represents a critical yet often overlooked aspect to care of pediatric neurosurgical patients. The pediatric neurosurgeon must be able to distill immensely complex and high-risk procedures into simple, understandable terms. Furthermore, they must recognize when the child’s dissent or refusal to treatment is acceptable. In general, allowing children to be involved in their neurosurgical care is empowering and gives them both identity and agency, which is the vital first step to a successful neurosurgical intervention.

Who Are We Missing? The Impact of Requiring Parental or Guardian Consent on Research With Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Two-Spirit, Queer/Questioning Youth

Who Are We Missing? The Impact of Requiring Parental or Guardian Consent on Research With Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Two-Spirit, Queer/Questioning Youth
Adolescent Health Brief
Eli Cwinn, Courtney Cadieux, Claire V. Crooks
Journal of Adolescent Health, 13 October 2020
Open Access
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose was to examine whether a requirement for parental or guardian consent systematically limits which lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, two-spirit, queer/questioning (LGBT2Q+) youth participate in research.
Methods
A total of 60 LGBT2Q+ youth (aged 14–18 years) completed measures assessing gender and sexual minority identity, depression and anxiety, help-seeking intentions, and social support.
Results
A substantial proportion (37.6%) of youth reported that they would not have participated in the research if parental or guardian consent was required. Those who would not have participated had more negative attitudes about their sexual and gender identity, less family support, lower levels of help-seeking intentions, and higher levels of negative affect.
Conclusions
The results suggest that requiring parental or guardian consent may exclude the most at-risk youth. Policy and practice decisions regarding the health and mental health outcomes of LGBT2Q+ youth might be based on incomplete and unrepresentative data.

How acceptable is adolescent self-consent for the HPV vaccination: Findings from a qualitative study in south-west England

How acceptable is adolescent self-consent for the HPV vaccination: Findings from a qualitative study in south-west England
Suzanne Audrey, Michelle Farr, Marion Roderick, Karen Evans, Harriet Fisher
Vaccine, 9 October 2020
Open Access
Abstract
Background
Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programmes have the potential to reduce the incidence of cervical cancer. The preferred age for HPV vaccination is 12–13 years for optimal benefit. The legal framework in England allows adolescents to be vaccinated without parental consent if they are assessed as competent. A ‘South West Template Pathway on Self Consent for School Aged Immunisations’ was developed to improve uptake of immunisations in south-west England.
Study aim
To examine how acceptable the new procedures are to the young women, parents and carers, school staff and immunisation nurses involved.
Methods
The research was undertaken in two local authorities in south-west England during the 2017/18 and 2018/19 programme years. Semi-structured digitally recorded interviews were undertaken with 53 participants: one health service manager, three immunisation nurses, five staff at alternative education providers, three staff at mainstream schools, 19 young women and 22 parents. All recordings were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was undertaken, assisted by NVivo software.
Results
Most participants were not fully aware of the legal framework that enables a young person to self-consent to vaccination. There was a strong presumption that parents should make decisions affecting the health of their children. The preferred age at which the HPV vaccination is administered (12–13 years) contributed to reluctance in endorsing self-consent which was thought to have the potential to break down trust between parents and school staff, and within families. In practice, formal self-consent was rare.
Conclusion
Unresolved issues in relation to adolescent self-consent include public and professional perceptions of young people’s rights and abilities to take responsibility for decisions affecting their health, and concerns about the impact of self-consent on relationships both within families and between professionals and the families they serve.

Adolescent Barriers to HIV Prevention Research: Are Parental Consent Requirements the Biggest Obstacle?

Adolescent Barriers to HIV Prevention Research: Are Parental Consent Requirements the Biggest Obstacle?
Original Article
Seema K. Shah, Zaynab Essack, Katherine Byron, Catherine Slack, Daniel Reirden, Heidi van Rooyen, Nathan R. Jones, David S. Wendler
Journal of Adolescent Health, 1 October 2020; 67(4) pp 495-501
Abstract
Purpose
One third of people newly living with HIV/AIDS are adolescents. Research on adolescent HIV prevention is critical owing to differences between adolescents and adults. Parental permission requirements are often considered a barrier to adolescent enrollment in research, but whether adolescents view this barrier as the most important one is unclear.
Methods
Adolescents were approached in schools in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, and at a sexually transmitted infection clinic at the Children’s Hospital of Aurora, Colorado. Surveys with a hypothetical vignette about participation in a pre-exposure prophylaxis trial were conducted on smartphones or tablets with 75 adolescents at each site. We calculated descriptive statistics for all variables, using 2-sample tests for equality of proportions with continuity correction. Statistical significance was calculated at p < 0.05. Multivariate analyses were also conducted.
Results
Most adolescents thought side effects (77%) and parental consent requirements (69%) were very important barriers to research participation. When asked to rank barriers, adolescents did not agree on a single barrier as most important, but the largest group of adolescents ranked parental consent requirements as most important (29.5%). Parental consent was seen as more of a barrier for adolescents in South Africa than in the United States. Concerns about being experimented on or researchers’ mandatory reporting to authorities were ranked much lower. Finally, most (71%, n = 106) adolescents said they would want to extra support from another adult if parental permission was not required.
Conclusion
Adolescents consider both parental permission requirements and side effects important barriers to their enrollment in HIV prevention research. Legal reform and better communication strategies may help address these barriers.

Informed Consent and Health: A Global Analysis, Thierry Vansweevelt and Nicola Glover-Thomas (eds) [BOOK REVIEW]

Informed Consent and Health: A Global Analysis, Thierry Vansweevelt and Nicola Glover-Thomas (eds) [BOOK REVIEW]
Craig Purshouse
Medical Law Review, 28 October 2020
Excerpt
The English law of ‘informed consent’, which regulates what information doctors should provide to patients, has been influenced by, and influenced, other jurisdictions. In Sidaway v Bethlem Royal Hospital, Lord Scarman (in the minority) referred to the ‘transatlantic doctrine of informed consent’ and endorsed the prudent patient test as the determinant of information disclosure. The majority of the House of Lords, however, rejected the patient-friendly approach prevalent in the USA and Canada and, instead, adopted the Bolam standard of disclosure, whereby doctors would escape liability provided they complied with peer opinion regarding what information should be disclosed to patients. The High Court of Australia chose a different path…