Implementing two-stage consent pathway in neonatal trials
Short Report
Eleanor Mitchell, Sam J Oddie, Jon Dorling, Chris Gale, Mark John Johnson, William McGuire, Shalini Ojha
Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition, 23 December 2021
Abstract
Perinatal trials sometimes require rapid recruitment processes to facilitate inclusion of participants when interventions are time-critical. A two-stage consent pathway has been used in some trials and is supported by national guidance. This pathway includes seeking oral assent for participation during the time-critical period followed by informed written consent later. This approach is being used in the fluids exclusively enteral from day one (FEED1) trial where participants need to be randomised within 3 hours of birth. There is some apprehension about approaching parents for participation via the oral assent pathway. The main reasons for this are consistent with previous research: lack of a written record, lack of standardised information and unfamiliarity with the process. Here, we describe how the pathway has been implemented in the FEED1 trial and the steps the trial team have taken to support sites. We provide recommendations for future trials to consider if they are considering implementing a similar pathway…

Informed consent and assent guide for paediatric clinical trials in Europe
Original Research
Pirkko Lepola, Maxine Kindred, Viviana Giannuzzi, Heidi Glosli, Martine Dehlinger-Kremer, Harris Dalrymple, David Neubauer, Geraldine B Boylan, Jean Conway, Jo Dewhurst, Diane Hoffman
Archives of Disease in Childhood, 1 December 2021
Abstract
Objective
Clinical trial sponsors spend considerable resources preparing informed consent (IC) and assent documentation for multinational paediatric clinical trial applications in Europe due to the limited and dispersed patient populations, the variation of national legal and ethical requirements, and the lack of detailed guidance. The aim of this study was to design new easy-to-use guide publicly available on European Medicines Agency’s, Enpr-EMA website for all stakeholders.
Methods
Current EU legal, ethical and regulatory guidance for paediatric clinical trials were collated, analysed and divided into 30 subject elements in two tables. The European Network of Young Person’s Advisory Group reviewed the data and provided specific comments. A three-level recommendation using ‘traffic light’ symbols was designed for four age groups of children, according to relevance and the requirements.
Results
A single guide document includes two tables: (1) general information and (2) trial-specific information. In the age group of 6–9 years old, 92% of the trial-specific subject elements can be or should be included in the IC discussion. Even in the youngest possible age group (2–5 years old children), the number of elements considered was, on average, 52%.
Conclusion
The EU Clinical Trial Regulation (2014) does not contain specific requirements exclusively for paediatric clinical trials. This work is the first to extensively collate all the current legal, regulatory and ethical documentation on the IC process, together with input from adolescents. This guide may increase the ethical standards in paediatric clinical trials.

Consent models in Canadian critical care randomized controlled trials: a scoping review
Review Article
Katie O’Hearn, Jess Gibson, Karla Krewulak, Rebecca Porteous, Victoria Saigle, Margaret Sampson, Anne Tsampalieros, Nick Barrowman, Saoirse Cameron, the Canadian Critical Care Trials Group
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, 8 November 2021
Open Access
Abstract
Purpose
Our primary objective was to describe consent models used in Canadian-led adult and pediatric intensive care unit (ICU/PICU) randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Our secondary objectives were to determine the consent rate of ICU/PICU RCTs that did and did not use an alternate consent model to describe consent procedures.
Source
Using scoping review methodology, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases (from 1998 to June 2019) for trials published in English or French. We included Canadian-led RCTs that reported on the effects of an intervention on ICU/PICU patients or their families. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility, abstracted data, and achieved consensus.
Principal findings
We identified 48 RCTs of 17,558 patients. Included RCTs had ethics approval to use prior informed consent (43/48; 90%), deferred consent (13/48; 27%), waived consent (5/48; 10%), and verbal consent (1/48; 2%) models. Fifteen RCTs (15/48; 31%) had ethics approval to use more than one consent model. Twice as many trials used alternate consent between 2010 and 2019 (13/19) than between 2000 and 2009 (6/19). The consent rate for RCTs using only prior informed consent ranged from 54 to 91% (ICU) and 43 to 94% (PICU) and from 78 to 100% (ICU) and 74 to 87% (PICU) in trials using an alternate/hybrid consent model.
Conclusion
Alternate consent models were used in the minority of Canadian-led ICU/PICU RCTs but have been used more frequently over the last decade. This suggests that Canadian ethics boards and research communities are becoming more accepting of alternate consent models in ICU/PICU trials.

Race, Place, and The Federal Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC): A Semiotic Approach [DISSERTATION]
Samantha Whitney Stein
UCLA, 2021
Abstract
The Exception from Informed Consent (EFIC) regulatory mechanism can be used to waive federal informed consent requirements for emergency medical research, pending satisfaction of pre-trial requirements. EFIC’s most notoriously challenging pre-trial requirement is ‘community consultation,’ a process through which EFIC researchers solicit public feedback on their trials. Using a Peircean semiotic framework, this thesis unpacks the presuppositions undergirding the idea that community consultation can reduce friction between emergency clinical trials carried out without informed consent and the values of patients enrolled in them. I introduce a semiotics of prediction, showing how assumptions about race figure prominently in the commensuration-based tasks of selecting community consultation respondents and subsequently generalizing findings from these respondents to broader populations. I suggest that in practice the content and / or generalizability of feedback collected through community consultation has very limited utility for reducing friction. Rather, community consultation’s primary function—as it is currently operationalized—is one of public relations, whereby the discursive processes through which community feedback is solicited have more bearing on EFIC trials’ public acceptability than the content of community feedback and the ability of biomedical research actors to transpose this content across contexts. By examining who participates in / is affected by the discursive processes through which community feedback is solicited, I help explain otherwise untheorized yet nonetheless troubling disparities between the acceptability of EFIC as determined by community consultation respondents and the acceptability of EFIC as determined by EFIC trial participants and their surrogates.