The oral communication principle and coming up to informed decision requirements in national screening programs
Short Communication
Birkeland
Public Health, May 2020; 182 pp 51-52
Abstract
Objective
Informed consent (IC) principles are often overlooked aspects in debates about national screening programs. This short communication examines the Danish approach to IC in decision-making about screening participation.
Study design
A descriptive approach is adopted in linking present screening practices with Danish regulation about IC and international ethical principles.
Methods
To ascertain the extent to which screening procedures come up to IC requirements, the article adopts a review approach by examining relevant Danish national legislation including ministerial orders as well as international ethical codes.
Results
The article finds that, although Danish legislation as well as international IC principles generally stipulates a decision-making process requiring oral communication, current procedures largely rely on one-way communication through written information available from leaflets, web sites, etc. Screening programs seem to have established no general formula to qualify healthcare users’ understanding of data underlying their choice whether to be screened.
Conclusion
The deviance from common IC principles may reduce healthcare quality, pose a safety problem, and challenge healthcare users’ ability to exercise autonomy.

Racial differences in patient consent policy preferences for electronic health information exchange
Carolyn L Turvey, Dawn M Klein, Kim M Nazi, Susan T Haidary, Omar Bouhaddou, Nelson Hsing, Margaret Donahue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 9 March 2020
Abstract
Objective
This study aimed to explore the association between demographic variables, such as race and gender, and patient consent policy preferences for health information exchange as well as self-report by VHA enrollees of information continuity between Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and community non-VHA heath care providers.
Materials and Methods
Data were collected between March 25, 2016 and August 22, 2016 in an online survey of 19 567 veterans. Three questions from the 2016 Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey, which addressed care continuity, were included. The survey also included questions about consent policy preference regarding opt-out, opt-in, and “break the glass” consent policies.
Results
VHA enrollees had comparable proportions of unnecessary laboratory testing and conflicting information from providers when compared with the United States sample in the Commonwealth Survey. However, they endorsed medical record information being unavailable between organizations more highly. Demographic variables were associated with gaps in care continuity as well as consent policy preferences, with 56.8% of Whites preferring an opt-out policy as compared with 40.3% of Blacks, 44.9% of Hispanic Latinos, 48.3% of Asian/Pacific Islanders, and 38.3% of Native Americans (P < .001).
Discussion
Observed large differences by race and ethnicity in privacy preferences for electronic health information exchange should inform implementation of these programs to ensure cultural sensitivity. Veterans experienced care continuity comparable to a general United States sample, except for less effective exchange of health records between heath care organizations. VHA followed an opt-in consent policy at the time of this survey which may underlie this gap.

Researcher and study participants’ perspectives of consent in clinical studies in four referral hospitals in Vietnam
Nguyen Thi Thanh Thuy, Le Nguyen Thanh Nhan, Nguyen Van Vinh Chau, Nguyen Thi Phuong Dung
BMC Medical Ethics, 2020; pp 1-12
Abstract
Background
Within the research community, it is generally accepted that consent processes for research should be culturally appropriate and tailored to the context, yet researchers continue to grapple with what valid consent means within specific stakeholder groups. In this study, we explored the consent practices and attitudes regarding essential information required for the consent process within hospital-based trial communities from four referral hospitals in Vietnam.
Methods
We collected surveys from and conducted semi-structured interviews with study physicians, study nurses, ethics committee members, and study participants and family members regarding their experiences of participating in research, their perspectives toward research, and their views about various elements of the consent process.
Results
In our findings, we describe three interrelated themes related to the consent process: (1) words and regulation; (2) reimbursement, suspicions, and joining; and (3) responsibilities. In general, stakeholders had highly varied perspectives of nghiên cứu (Eng.: research) and researchers used varying levels of detail regarding all aspects of the study in the consent process to build trust with and/or promote potential research participants’ choices about taking part in research. Findings additionally highlight how researchers felt that offering financial reimbursements in a hospital setting, where payment for services was routine, would be unfamiliar to participants and could raise suspicions about the research. Participants, however, focused their discussions on reimbursement or alternative reasons for joining the study, such as health related benefits or altruism. Finally, participants often relied on their physician to help them decide about joining a study or not.
Conclusion
Further research is needed to understand how researchers and participants make sense of and practice consent, and how that impacts participants’ decision-making about research participation. To promote valid consent within this context, it is important to engage with hospital-based trial communities as a whole. The data from this study will inform future research on consent, guide the revisions of consent related policies within our research sites and point to several larger issues surrounding researcher-participant expectations, communication, and trust.

Facilitators, barriers, and recommendations related to the informed consent of Marshallese in a randomized control trial
Research Article
Rachel S Purvis, Leah R Eisenberg, Christopher R Trudeau, Christopher R Long, Pearl A McElfish
Clinical Ethics, 2 February 2020
Abstract
Background
The Pacific Islander population is the second fasting growing population in the United States and Arkansas is home to the largest Marshallese population in the continental US. The Marshallese community have significant health disparities with high prevalence of diabetes, heart disease, and obesity compared to the general US population. Using a community-based participatory research approach, researchers and Marshallese community stakeholders identified diabetes as the top health issue for research.
Methods
From 2014 to 2018, a randomized control trial was conducted comparing standard diabetes management education with a culturally adapted family model of standard diabetes management education delivered in participants’ homes by Marshallese community health workers and certified diabetes educators. Interviews were held with Marshallese participants to document their experiences with and perceptions of the informed consent process for this randomized control trial.
Results
Participants provided feedback on the process of enrolling in the study, describing barriers and facilitators to giving informed consent from their perspective, and offering recommendations for improving the informed consent process.
Conclusion
Findings suggest that informed consent with underserved communities, including immigrant and migrant populations who do not speak English or have limited English proficiency, is possible, and that using a community-based participatory research approach can help facilitate the informed consent process.

Translations of informed consent documents for clinical trials in South Africa: are they readable? [MA DISSERTATION]
Makiti Thelma Leopeng
University of Cape Town, Maternal and Child Health in the Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, February 2019
Open Access
Abstract
Introduction
Obtaining Informed consent is an ethical prerequisite for enrollment in clinical research. There is a perception that Informed consent documents used in biomedical research are lengthy, overly complex and above the reading capability of typical research participants. In South Africa, ethical committees regulating research on human participants (HRECs) are mandated by the Department of Health’s National Health Research Ethics Council’s (NHREC) guidelines to ensure that researchers have made special considerations for vulnerable groups when conducting research. This includes considerations made for populations with low literacy. For example, the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) of the University of Cape Town’s Human Research Ethics Committee (UCTHREC), requires that the language used in Informed consent documents should be directed at a reading level of grade 6 to 8 and that common, everyday words should be used rather than complex language syntax. The HREC expects researchers to translate the approved English version documents into local languages such as isiXhosa and Afrikaans. Since ethics committee focus approval on the English language consent documents and only acknowledge translated versions, a potential gap in this process is whether the translated versions meet the same required readability levels. This study aims to investigate whether translated versions of English language informed consent documents used at a single busy clinical research site are readable and meet the readability levels specified by UCTHREC. 14
Methodology
A quantitative descriptive statistical design was used to explore readability levels of informed consent documents used at a single clinical research facility based in a semi-rural community. Informed consent documents approved by UCTHREC over the past thirteen years (2004 to 2017) that met the inclusion criteria were analysed for readability. The LIX readability test tool was used to calculate readability scores and the levels of reading difficulty. These scores were then matched to a grade level conversion chart to determine the equivalent number of education years required to be able to easily understand the information. Readability levels were determined for isiXhosa and Afrikaans translations of the documents and compared to the levels of the English document.
Results
The results indicate that informed consent documents used at this single clinical research facility, independent of language type, are difficult to read. A total of 259 sub-sections of informed consent documents from 10 different studies were analysed. The analysis showed that informed consent documents were classified as “very difficult to read” according to the LIX readability tool in a large proportion of English, isiXhosa and Afrikaans languages: 41 (16%), 255 (98%), and 85 (33%) of informed consent sections respectively. Of all the subsections of English, isiXhosa and Afrikaans documents respectively, 98 (38%), 0 (0%) and 126 (49%) were classified as “difficult to read”, while 79 (31%), 3 (1%) and 38 (15%) were found to have an “average” readability level. Twenty eight (11%), 1 (0%) and 10 (4%) were found to be “easy to read” and 13 (5%), 0 (0%) and 0 (0%) had a “very easy” readability level. The mean LIX readability scores across English, isiXhosa, and Afrikaans languages were respectively 42.27 (95% CI 41.20 – 43.34) corresponding to a readability level of “average”, 74.64 (95% CI 73.79-75.49), corresponding to “very difficult to read” and 46.73 (95% CI 15 45.66-47.8) “difficult to read”. These findings suggest a high level of difficulty in reading of the text in the Informed consent documents.
Conclusion
Translations of Informed consent documents used at a single busy clinical research site are difficult to read and are written at high school to tertiary reading level. These reading levels are above the recommended level prescribed by the site’s research ethics committee (UCTHREC). Local ethics committees should employ more stringent guidelines and checks to ensure readability of translated informed consent documents. Researchers and Sponsors should include readability outcomes in the design and with submissions of new protocols.

Informed Consent to Vaccination: Theoretical, Legal, and Empirical Insights
Research Article
Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, Nili Karako-Eyal
American Journal of Law and Medicine, 23 January 2020
Abstract
Informed consent matters — so does protecting people from infectious diseases. This paper examines what the appropriate informed consent process for vaccines should look like and how the process is conceptualized by law and health authorities. Drawing on the extensive theoretical and empirical literature on informed consent and vaccination, this article sets out what an ideal informed consent process for vaccination would consist of, highlighting the need for autonomous decisions. To be autonomous, decisions need to be based on full, accessible information and reached without coercion. We suggest that the information provided must address the nature of the procedure — including benefits to the child, benefits to society, and risks. Parents should have their concerns and misconceptions addressed. The information needs to be accessible and include an opportunity to ask questions. Based on this ideal model we examined in detail the legal framework surrounding informed consent to vaccination and the process as conceptualized by health authorities in two countries, Israel and the United States, to assess whether they meet the requirements. These two countries are similar in some of their values, for example, the importance of individual autonomy, and face similar problems related to vaccine hesitancy. At the same time, there are meaningful differences in their vaccine policies and the current structures of their informed consent processes, allowing for a meaningful comparison. We found neither country met our ideal informed consent process, and suggested improvements both to the materials and to the processes used to obtain informed consent.

Effect of language and country of birth on the consent process and medical suitability of potential organ donors; a linked-data cohort study 2010–2015
Karen M.J. Waller, James A. Hedley, Brenda M. Rosales, Nicole L. De La Mata, Imogen K. Thomson, John Walker, Patrick J. Kelly, Michael J. O’Leary, Elena Cavazzoni, Kate R. Wyburn, Angela C. Webster
Journal of Critical Care, 22 January 2020
Abstract
Purpose
Australia has unmet need for transplantation. We sought to assess the impact of cultural and linguistic diversity (CALD) on family consent and medical suitability for organ donation.
Method
Cohort study of New South Wales donor referrals, 2010–2015. Logistic regression estimated effects of primary language other than English and birthplace outside Australia (odds ratios OR, with 95% confidence intervals, 95%CI). Outcomes were whether families were asked for consent to donation, provided consent for donation, and whether the referral was medically suitable for donation.
Results
Of 2977 organ donor referrals, a similar proportion of families had consent for donation was sought between non-English speakers and English speakers (p = .07), and between overseas-born compared to Australian-born referrals (p = .3). However, consent was less likely to be given for both non-English speakers than English speakers (OR 0.44, 95%CI:0.29–0.67), and those overseas-born than Australian-born (OR 0.54, 95%CI:0.41–0.72). For referrals both overseas-born and non-English speaking, families were both less likely to be asked for consent (OR 0.67; 95%CI:0.49–0.91) or give consent (OR 0.24; 95%CI0.16–0.37). There was no difference in medical suitability between English speakers and non-English speakers (p = .6), or between Australian-born and overseas-born referrals (p = .6).
Conclusion
Intervention to improve consent rates from CALD families may increase donation.

There’s ‘consent’ and then there’s consent: Mobilising Māori and Indigenous research ethics to problematise the western biomedical model
Research Article
Kiri West-McGruer
Journal of Sociology, 13 January 2020  
Abstract
Challenging western research conventions has a strong documented history in Indigenous critical theory and Kaupapa Māori research discourse. This article will draw from the existing research in these fields and expand on some of the core critiques of the biomedical model in Māori research environments. Of interest are the tensions produced by an over-reliance on individual informed consent as the panacea of ethical research, particularly when the research concerns communities who prioritise collective autonomy. These tensions are further exacerbated in research environments where knowledge is commodified and issues of knowledge ownership are present. Continuing a critique of the informed consenting procedure, this article considers its role in emulating a capitalist exchange of goods and perpetuating a knowledge economy premised on the exploitation of Indigenous people, resources and knowledge. Finally, this article will consider emerging ethical concerns regarding secondary data use in an era of big data.

Researcher and study participants’ perspectives of consent in clinical studies in four referral hospitals in Vietnam
Research Article
Jennifer Ilo Van Nuil, Thi Thanh Thuy Nguyen, Thanh Nhan Le Nguyen, Van Vinh Chau Nguyen, Mary Chambers, Thi Dieu Ngan Ta, Laura Merson, Thi Phuong Dung Nguyen, Minh Tu Van Hoang, Michael Parker, Susan Bull & Evelyne Kestelyn
BMC Medical Ethics, 10 January 2020; 21(4) 
Open Access
Abstract
Background
Within the research community, it is generally accepted that consent processes for research should be culturally appropriate and tailored to the context, yet researchers continue to grapple with what valid consent means within specific stakeholder groups. In this study, we explored the consent practices and attitudes regarding essential information required for the consent process within hospital-based trial communities from four referral hospitals in Vietnam.
Methods
We collected surveys from and conducted semi-structured interviews with study physicians, study nurses, ethics committee members, and study participants and family members regarding their experiences of participating in research, their perspectives toward research, and their views about various elements of the consent process.
Results
In our findings, we describe three interrelated themes related to the consent process: (1) words and regulation; (2) reimbursement, suspicions, and joining; and (3) responsibilities. In general, stakeholders had highly varied perspectives of nghiên cứu (Eng.: research) and researchers used varying levels of detail regarding all aspects of the study in the consent process to build trust with and/or promote potential research participants’ choices about taking part in research. Findings additionally highlight how researchers felt that offering financial reimbursements in a hospital setting, where payment for services was routine, would be unfamiliar to participants and could raise suspicions about the research. Participants, however, focused their discussions on reimbursement or alternative reasons for joining the study, such as health related benefits or altruism. Finally, participants often relied on their physician to help them decide about joining a study or not.
Conclusion
Further research is needed to understand how researchers and participants make sense of and practice consent, and how that impacts participants’ decision-making about research participation. To promote valid consent within this context, it is important to engage with hospital-based trial communities as a whole. The data from this study will inform future research on consent, guide the revisions of consent related policies within our research sites and point to several larger issues surrounding researcher-participant expectations, communication, and trust.

Informed consent procedure in a double blind randomized anthelminthic trial on Pemba Island, Tanzania: do pamphlet and information session increase caregivers knowledge?
Research Article
Marta S. Palmeirim, Amanda Ross, Brigit Obrist, Ulfat A. Mohammed, Shaali M. Ame, Said M. Ali, Jennifer Keiser
BMC Medical Ethics, 6 January 2020; 21(1)
Open Access
Abstract
Background
In clinical research, obtaining informed consent from participants is an ethical and legal requirement. Conveying the information concerning the study can be done using multiple methods yet this step commonly relies exclusively on the informed consent form alone. While this is legal, it does not ensure the participant’s true comprehension. New effective methods of conveying consent information should be tested. In this study we compared the effect of different methods on the knowledge of caregivers of participants of a clinical trial on Pemba Island, Tanzania.
Methods
A total of 254 caregivers were assigned to receive (i) a pamphlet (n = 63), (ii) an oral information session (n = 62) or (iii) a pamphlet and an oral information session (n = 64) about the clinical trial procedures, their rights, benefits and potential risks. Their post-intervention knowledge was assessed using a questionnaire. One group of caregivers had not received any information when they were interviewed (n = 65).
Results
In contrast to the pamphlet, attending an information session significantly increased caregivers’ knowledge for some of the questions. Most of these questions were either related to the parasite (hookworm) or to the trial design (study procedures).
Conclusions
In conclusion, within our trial on Pemba Island, a pamphlet was found to not be a good form of conveying clinical trial information while an oral information session improved knowledge. Not all caregivers attending an information session responded correctly to all questions; therefore, better forms of communicating information need to be found to achieve a truly informed consent.