Pulling Out the Rug on Informed Consent — New Legal Threats to Clinicians and Patients

This month we have chosen to highlight an article which appeared in the New England Journal of Medicine, Pulling Out the Rug on Informed Consent — New Legal Threats to Clinicians and Patients, reflecting the impact of changes in US law on informed consent. In their perspective piece, Underhill and Nelson write about the change to Utah’s Malpractice Act which allows the retroactive withdrawal of consent given as a minor, leaving clinicians vulnerable to future litigation. We are highlighting this article as we are concerned about the intersection of politics and ideology here. Consent is an important to the patient as to the physician, and the role of consent should not be used to further an agenda. We are reaching out to the authors to explore potential pathways forward.

Pulling Out the Rug on Informed Consent — New Legal Threats to Clinicians and Patients
Perspective
Kristen Underhill, Kimberly M. Nelson
New England Journal of Medicine, 1 February 2025
Abstract
A legal technique deployed by Utah to restrict gender-affirming care for minors aims at a core component of the clinician–patient relationship: clinicians’ ability to rely on patients’ informed consent.
Excerpt
   In recent years, state legislators in large portions of the United States have devised and enacted new legal strategies to limit access to health care for transgender people. To date, 26 states have enacted outright bans on gender-affirming care, which thus far apply only to minors. Other state laws create financial or procedural obstacles to this type of care, such as bans on insurance coverage, requirements to obtain opinions from multiple clinicians, or consent protocols that are stricter than those for other health care…
Allowing patients to withdraw their consent retroactively is an acute threat to the legal infrastructure supporting U.S. healthcare. Informed-consent requirements exist to ensure that patients have the information and agency to participate in their own healthcare. They also protect clinicians. In all practice areas, clinicians expect to rely on patients’ consent at the time of care, without having to guess which patients will later change their minds. If laws eliminate clinicians’ ability to rely on consent at the time of care, the resulting legal instability may undermine access to all types of health care services. Pulling out the rug on informed consent threatens the core of the clinician–patient relationship. Clinicians in every area should recognize that these laws are not just attacking gender-affirming care — they are attacking the foundation of the U.S. health care system.

Spotlight

SPOTLIGHT

For our spotlight section this month, we have highlighted several important articles that are drawn from our Young Persons and Capacity to Consent sections. . These articles are excellent examples of an emerging literature addressing  assent and decisional capacity in young persons, and implications for responsible research and public health. The final article highlights an important jurisdictional matter involving consent and the legal consequence of refusing HPV vaccination in Indonesia.  We are reaching out to our in-country colleagues in Indonesia to explore this further and will report our findings in a future edition.

Navigating Methodological Challenges and Informed Consent in Pediatric Research: A Scoping Literature Review
C Van Isterdael, Z Claessens, I Huys
Value in Health, December 2024
Abstract
Objectives
In the European health policy space, unmet medical needs are increasingly recognised as essential factors to steer pharmaceutical research and development towards a patient-centred healthcare system. However, the needs of challenging populations, such as paediatric patients, are often overlooked, resulting in substantial unmet needs. This study aims to provide an overview of challenges reported in literature on unmet health related needs in paediatric patients, as well as informed consent forms (ICFs) used in paediatric research.
Methods
This scoping literature review is a case study on paediatric blood cancer patients, following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. Two databases were included, PubMed and Embase. Descriptive data as well as qualitative data on methodological challenges and quantitative data on ICF was obtained from the included articles.
Results
In total, 52 articles were included for analysis. Methodological challenges in research on paediatric patients can be categorised by research stage. During recruitment, obtaining a representative sample can be challenging. Moreover, regarding data retrieval, discrepancies may arise between parent and child perspectives and researchers must be aware of parental dominance when interviewing children. Lastly, distinguishing development and disease-related changes can be challenging. ICFs were analysed in relation to the patients’ ages. In studies addressing minors, there was a tendency to involve adolescents rather than younger children. In most cases, parental informed consent (IC) was obtained, complemented with patients’ assent or IC. When studies focused on the needs of younger children, parents typically served as the respondents, either alone or with their child. In the latter case, an equal number of studies obtained IC from parents alone and complemented with the patients’ IC or assent.
Conclusions
This study provides an overview of methodological challenges and ICFs used in studies regarding research on identifying unmet health related needs in paediatric patients.

Decisional Capacity to Consent to Treatment in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review
Review Article
Giovanna Parmigiani, Marcello Benevento, Biagio Solarino, Anna Margari, Davide Ferorelli, Luigi Buongiorno, Roberto Catanesi, Felice Carabellese, Antonio Del Casale, Stefano Ferracuti, Gabriele Mandarelli
Psychiatry Research, 25 December 2024
Abstract
Obtaining informed consent in vulnerable populations like children and adolescents, is a relevant issue and raises ethical concerns. Minors are considered unable to consent to treatment, and permission from guardians is required for them. Nevertheless, several studies have been carried out on the competence of pediatric patients, with mixed results. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was performed to assess children and adolescents’ decisional capacity to consent to treatment. The search strategy identified 2,790 studies, including 10 that survived full-text screening and evaluation. Studies included in the analysis evaluated the decision-making capacity of minors using the MacArthur Competency Assessment Tool – Treatment (MacCAT-T), the Adolescent Psychiatric Patient Competency Questionnaire (CQ-ChP); the Measure of Competency (MOC), the Measure of Competency- Hypothetical (MOC-Hyp). Overall, minors over the age of 13 showed an acceptable decisional capacity. However, further research, preferably on larger groups, is needed to shed more light on this topic.

Improving consent practices in paediatric populations: what can be done?
Letter
Matthew Formstone, Laura Bengree, Robert Wheeler
Archives of Disease in Childhood, 11 January 2025
Excerpt
    The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Gillick judgement,1 taken together, establish clear legal principles to guide consent practices in paediatrics. However, a recent retrospective review of local consent practices highlighted significant shortcomings, primarily concerning clinical documentation.
   Our study reviewed consent practices in oncology and surgery in a UK children’s hospital, analysing clinical notes and consent forms from 63 children. Among under-16s, only three patient records explicitly documented competence, while most children apparently deferred consent to parents, although this conclusion remains speculative since no explanation was recorded. Even among presumedly capacitous 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds, documentation of decision-making processes was very poor. We have no reason to believe our…

Balancing Parental Rights and Public Health: The Challenge of Childhood Vaccination in a Changing Landscape
Commentary
Yang, Y. Tony, Sarah Schaffer
Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, January-February 2025; 31(1) pp 1-4
Abstract
The decline in childhood vaccination rates, exacerbated by the confluence of anti-vaccine sentiment and parental rights advocacy, presents a multifaceted challenge to public health.1 This issue impacts community health and safety, with U.S. measles cases in early 2024 already surpassing 2023 totals.2 Recent surveys show a marked decline in the perceived importance of childhood vaccinations, particularly among Republicans.3 National vaccination coverage for incoming kindergartners dropped from 95% in 2019-2020 to 93% in 2022-2023, with exemption rates increasing in 41 states.4 This trend, coupled with growing support for parental choice to skip vaccines among certain demographic groups,5 underscores the complexity of the current public health landscape. Reflecting this shift, a recent state legislative trend toward requiring explicit parental consent for childhood vaccinations represents a pivotal shift in the public health landscape (Table 1).6 These initiatives, which now often require written informed consent rather than the previously sufficient verbal or implied consent, aim to protect parental rights but can also create barriers that may delay or prevent the administration of vaccines to minors, particularly affecting vulnerable populations. For instance, children from low-income families or those in the foster care system may face significant challenges in obtaining written informed consent from their parents or guardians. This can lead to delays or missed opportunities for vaccination, potentially putting these children at a higher risk of contracting vaccine-preventable diseases and exacerbating existing health disparities.

The Ethical Paradox of Informed Consent in HPV Vaccination: Examining the Legal Boundaries and Ethical Considerations of Parental Consent, Public Health, and Individual Rights
Filia Clementy Daniast Susilo, Bagus Faridian, Alexander Alif Nu’man, Pradina Candraning Tyas, Muhammad Luthfi Firdaus
Asian Journal of Medicine and Health, 17 December 2024
Abstract
Background and Objective
Effective communication is crucial in medical procedures, and informed consent is a key example of this. However, informed consent may face unique circumstances, such as in life support situations or government health programs. The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, as part of a government initiative, raises the question of whether informed consent is still required.  The study aims to explore whether informed consent is still necessary for the HPV vaccination and to analyze the legal implications if a citizen refuses to receive the vaccine. Patients have the right to refuse medical actions, making it essential to understand the legal consequences of rejecting the HPV vaccination.
Methods
This study adopts a normative juridical approach with an analytic descriptive specification. Secondary data was gathered from primary, secondary, and tertiary legal sources through literature reviews, document studies, and archival research. The collected data was then analyzed qualitatively and presented in a descriptive format.
Results
The study found that there are exceptions to the requirement for informed consent for vaccinations included in government programs. Specifically, informed consent is not necessary for individuals within the target age group of the government’s HPV vaccination program. In Indonesia, this program targets girls aged 9 to 14. Additionally, there are currently no legal penalties for individuals who refuse the HPV vaccination.
Conclusion
Informed consent is not required for individuals within the targeted age group of the government’s HPV vaccination program in Indonesia. Furthermore, there are no legal penalties for rejecting the vaccination.

Navigating Methodological Challenges and Informed Consent in Pediatric Research: A Scoping Literature Review

Navigating Methodological Challenges and Informed Consent in Pediatric Research: A Scoping Literature Review
C Van Isterdael, Z Claessens, I Huys
Value in Health, December 2024
Abstract
Objectives
In the European health policy space, unmet medical needs are increasingly recognised as essential factors to steer pharmaceutical research and development towards a patient-centred healthcare system. However, the needs of challenging populations, such as paediatric patients, are often overlooked, resulting in substantial unmet needs. This study aims to provide an overview of challenges reported in literature on unmet health related needs in paediatric patients, as well as informed consent forms (ICFs) used in paediatric research.
Methods
This scoping literature review is a case study on paediatric blood cancer patients, following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. Two databases were included, PubMed and Embase. Descriptive data as well as qualitative data on methodological challenges and quantitative data on ICF was obtained from the included articles.
Results
In total, 52 articles were included for analysis. Methodological challenges in research on paediatric patients can be categorised by research stage. During recruitment, obtaining a representative sample can be challenging. Moreover, regarding data retrieval, discrepancies may arise between parent and child perspectives and researchers must be aware of parental dominance when interviewing children. Lastly, distinguishing development and disease-related changes can be challenging. ICFs were analysed in relation to the patients’ ages. In studies addressing minors, there was a tendency to involve adolescents rather than younger children. In most cases, parental informed consent (IC) was obtained, complemented with patients’ assent or IC. When studies focused on the needs of younger children, parents typically served as the respondents, either alone or with their child. In the latter case, an equal number of studies obtained IC from parents alone and complemented with the patients’ IC or assent.
Conclusions
This study provides an overview of methodological challenges and ICFs used in studies regarding research on identifying unmet health related needs in paediatric patients.

Decisional Capacity to Consent to Treatment in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review

Decisional Capacity to Consent to Treatment in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review
Review Article
Giovanna Parmigiani, Marcello Benevento, Biagio Solarino, Anna Margari, Davide Ferorelli, Luigi Buongiorno, Roberto Catanesi, Felice Carabellese, Antonio Del Casale, Stefano Ferracuti, Gabriele Mandarelli
Psychiatry Research, 25 December 2024
Abstract
Obtaining informed consent in vulnerable populations like children and adolescents, is a relevant issue and raises ethical concerns. Minors are considered unable to consent to treatment, and permission from guardians is required for them. Nevertheless, several studies have been carried out on the competence of pediatric patients, with mixed results. Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was performed to assess children and adolescents’ decisional capacity to consent to treatment. The search strategy identified 2,790 studies, including 10 that survived full-text screening and evaluation. Studies included in the analysis evaluated the decision-making capacity of minors using the MacArthur Competency Assessment Tool – Treatment (MacCAT-T), the Adolescent Psychiatric Patient Competency Questionnaire (CQ-ChP); the Measure of Competency (MOC), the Measure of Competency- Hypothetical (MOC-Hyp). Overall, minors over the age of 13 showed an acceptable decisional capacity. However, further research, preferably on larger groups, is needed to shed more light on this topic.

Improving consent practices in paediatric populations: what can be done?

Improving consent practices in paediatric populations: what can be done?
Letter
Matthew Formstone, Laura Bengree, Robert Wheeler
Archives of Disease in Childhood, 11 January 2025
Excerpt
    The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Gillick judgement,1 taken together, establish clear legal principles to guide consent practices in paediatrics. However, a recent retrospective review of local consent practices highlighted significant shortcomings, primarily concerning clinical documentation.
Our study reviewed consent practices in oncology and surgery in a UK children’s hospital, analysing clinical notes and consent forms from 63 children. Among under-16s, only three patient records explicitly documented competence, while most children apparently deferred consent to parents, although this conclusion remains speculative since no explanation was recorded. Even among presumedly capacitous 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds, documentation of decision-making processes was very poor. We have no reason to believe our…

Balancing Parental Rights and Public Health: The Challenge of Childhood Vaccination in a Changing Landscape

Balancing Parental Rights and Public Health: The Challenge of Childhood Vaccination in a Changing Landscape
Commentary
Yang, Y. Tony, Sarah Schaffer
Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, January-February 2025; 31(1) pp 1-4
Abstract
The decline in childhood vaccination rates, exacerbated by the confluence of anti-vaccine sentiment and parental rights advocacy, presents a multifaceted challenge to public health.1 This issue impacts community health and safety, with U.S. measles cases in early 2024 already surpassing 2023 totals.2 Recent surveys show a marked decline in the perceived importance of childhood vaccinations, particularly among Republicans.3 National vaccination coverage for incoming kindergartners dropped from 95% in 2019-2020 to 93% in 2022-2023, with exemption rates increasing in 41 states.4 This trend, coupled with growing support for parental choice to skip vaccines among certain demographic groups,5 underscores the complexity of the current public health landscape. Reflecting this shift, a recent state legislative trend toward requiring explicit parental consent for childhood vaccinations represents a pivotal shift in the public health landscape (Table 1).6 These initiatives, which now often require written informed consent rather than the previously sufficient verbal or implied consent, aim to protect parental rights but can also create barriers that may delay or prevent the administration of vaccines to minors, particularly affecting vulnerable populations. For instance, children from low-income families or those in the foster care system may face significant challenges in obtaining written informed consent from their parents or guardians. This can lead to delays or missed opportunities for vaccination, potentially putting these children at a higher risk of contracting vaccine-preventable diseases and exacerbating existing health disparities.

The Ethical Paradox of Informed Consent in HPV Vaccination: Examining the Legal Boundaries and Ethical Considerations of Parental Consent, Public Health, and Individual Rights

The Ethical Paradox of Informed Consent in HPV Vaccination: Examining the Legal Boundaries and Ethical Considerations of Parental Consent, Public Health, and Individual Rights
Filia Clementy Daniast Susilo, Bagus Faridian, Alexander Alif Nu’man, Pradina Candraning Tyas, Muhammad Luthfi Firdaus
Asian Journal of Medicine and Health, 17 December 2024
Abstract
Background and Objective
Effective communication is crucial in medical procedures, and informed consent is a key example of this. However, informed consent may face unique circumstances, such as in life support situations or government health programs. The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, as part of a government initiative, raises the question of whether informed consent is still required.  The study aims to explore whether informed consent is still necessary for the HPV vaccination and to analyze the legal implications if a citizen refuses to receive the vaccine. Patients have the right to refuse medical actions, making it essential to understand the legal consequences of rejecting the HPV vaccination.
Methods
This study adopts a normative juridical approach with an analytic descriptive specification. Secondary data was gathered from primary, secondary, and tertiary legal sources through literature reviews, document studies, and archival research. The collected data was then analyzed qualitatively and presented in a descriptive format.
Results
The study found that there are exceptions to the requirement for informed consent for vaccinations included in government programs. Specifically, informed consent is not necessary for individuals within the target age group of the government’s HPV vaccination program. In Indonesia, this program targets girls aged 9 to 14. Additionally, there are currently no legal penalties for individuals who refuse the HPV vaccination.
Conclusion
Informed consent is not required for individuals within the targeted age group of the government’s HPV vaccination program in Indonesia. Furthermore, there are no legal penalties for rejecting the vaccination.

Spotlight

To start the new year, we have highlighted an article which broadens our thinking to informed consent at a population level. In the Public Health Ethics article Collective Consent to Xenotransplantation: A Critical Appraisal Bobier et al. discuss the need to go beyond surveying trends in public attitudes surrounding novel technologies which have the potential to impact the planet on a large scale and actively obtain collective consent for xenotransplantation procedures.

[Extract]
“…solid organ xenotransplantation… involves the transplantation of a genetically engineered porcine organ into a human recipient (Carrier et al., 2022; Fischer and Schnieke, 2022). There is concern, however, that a novel zoonotic disease could be trans­mitted from the source organ to the human recipient, then from the recipient to others. Theoretically, this could result in an epidemic or pandemic (Fishman, 2022; Thom et al., 2024).

Given the novelty of xeno­transplantation and the theoretical potential to cause significant harm, it has been the stated position of the World Health Organization (WHO) since 2008 that any xenotransplantation regulatory system must include ethical assessments that involve the public (WHO, 2008). Public engagement regarding novel medical technology promotes important (i) ethical, (ii) trans­parent and (iii) inclusive practices (Hurst and Cooper, 2024). However, some have gone further and argued that something more than the assessment of public viewpoints is needed. It has been argued that collective consent is required in addition to the due diligence of researchers and oversight organizations, such as the US Food and Drug Administration…

While the authors conclude that collective consent is not required in this case to proceed ethically, we have highlighted this article because it engages population level thinking, and is a useful example of a niche area in the informed consent landscape.

Collective Consent to Xenotransplantation: A Critical Appraisal
Christopher Bobier, Adam Omelianchuk, Daniel Rodger, Daniel J Hurst
Public Health Ethics, 12 December 2024
Abstract
Solid organ xenotransplantation may have the potential to help address the shortage of organs for transplantation. There is concern, however, that a novel zoonotic disease could be transmitted from the source organ to the human recipient, and then from the recipient to others. Theoretically, this could result in an epidemic or pandemic. Because of this potential risk, it has been argued that collective consent is required. Our goal is to critically evaluate the claim that collective consent is necessary for xenotransplantation to be ethically permissible. We argue that collective consent is not required and highlight the important roles of public engagement and due diligence in xenotransplant research moving forward.

Spotlight

This month we spotlight the new set of principles supporting ethical human genomic data collection and sharing released by the WHO in late November. In this normative guidance,  WHO addresses eight principles [detailed below], many of which touch on consent either directly or indirectly. In particular, the first principle [3.1] presents a number of consent-related recommendations which we highlight here:

3.1. To affirm and value the rights of individuals and communities to make decisions
   A commitment to affirm and value the rights and interests of individuals with capacity to make informed decisions about their human genome data throughout the data life cycle. In addition, a commitment to affirm the best interests of, and support for, individuals who do not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves.

The use of human genome data has implications beyond the individual, and the relevant views of family members and communities on collection, access to, use and sharing of these data should be taken into account throughout the data life cycle.

Recommendations: [selected]
:: Informed consent should be as specific and granular as possible in relation to the potential uses (including by for-profit entities and the potential to share the data to train artificial intelligence), benefits and harms possibly resulting from the use of human genome data, the infrastructure hosting the data (including location and access modalities), and this information must be tailored to respect social and cultural contexts.
:: The most appropriate informed consent model (e.g. specific, broad, tiered or dynamic informed consent) depends upon the individual/local context.
:: Informed consent should be supported by governance frameworks and processes, and individuals should be informed of such processes…
:: Individuals, families and communities should have access to clear, transparent, accessible, understandable and ongoing communication about their human genome data collection, access, use and sharing, for those who wish to receive that information. This ongoing communication should, where possible, continue throughout the data life cycle.
:: Individuals and their representative communities should be engaged in the governance and decision-making process regarding collection, access to, use and sharing of human genome data, including the development of appropriate informed consent models and processes.
:: Children, when sufficiently mature to understand what is involved in their participation, should be given the opportunity to affirm the informed consent previously given on their behalf or to withdraw their consent from that point onwards….

Below, we provide excerpts from the WHO media release and the full citation/overview of the guidance document.

WHO releases new principles for ethical human genomic data collection and sharing
20 November 2024
The World Health Organization (WHO) has issued a set of principles for the ethical collection, access, use and sharing of human genomic data. Created with guidance from the WHO Technical Advisory Group on Genomics (TAG-G) and other international experts, these principles establish a global approach to help protect individual rights, promote equity and foster responsible collaboration in genomic research…

“The potential of genomics to revolutionize health and disease understanding can only be realized if human genomic data are collected, accessed and shared responsibly,” says Dr  John Reeder, Director of WHO’s Research for Health Department. “This document outlines globally applicable principles designed to guide ethical, legal and equitable use of human genome data, fostering public trust and protecting the rights of individuals and communities. It serves as a call to action, urging all stakeholders to adhere to these principles and ensure the benefits of genomic advancements are accessible to everyone.”

The principles emphasize several core themes:
:: Informed consent and privacy are foundational, with clear guidelines to ensure that individuals understand and agree to how their genomic data will be used. WHO underscores the importance of transparency, requiring that data collection processes are openly communicated and safeguarded against misuse.
:: Another core focus is equity. The principles call for targeted efforts to address disparities in genomic research, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and for ensuring that genomic research benefits populations in all their diversity. By prioritizing the inclusion of underrepresented groups, the guidelines aim to promote broader and fairer representation in genomic research and its applications.
:: Recognizing the importance of international collaboration through partnerships across borders and sectors, WHO encourages collaborative efforts between governments, academia and the private sector to maximize the positive impact of genomic research. Responsible data sharing, supported by robust governance structures, is essential for advancing global health while respecting privacy.
:: WHO’s principles also address capacity building in regions with limited genomic infrastructure. By encouraging investment in local expertise and resources, the organization aims to close global disparities in research capacity, making genomic data practices more inclusive and sustainable.

The release of these principles represents a significant step forward in WHO’s mission to promote ethical genomics practices. As the field continues to evolve, these guidelines offer a trusted framework to support genomic research that is equitable, transparent and respectful of individual rights.

Guidance for human genome data collection, access, use and sharing
WHO – Guidance [normative]
20 November 2024 :: 22 pages
Overview
The ethical, legal, and equitable sharing of human genomic data is critical to advancing global health research and ensuring fair access to the benefits of genomics. The WHO’s new document outlines a comprehensive set of globally applicable principles designed to guide stakeholders in the responsible collection, use, and sharing of human genome data. This document serves as a key resource to navigate complex issues surrounding data governance, with the aim of fostering transparency, promoting equity, and safeguarding individual and collective rights. These principles are intended to support the implementation of best practices across diverse settings, thereby enhancing the global capacity for genomic research and its translation into health benefits for all.

Table of Contents [excerpt]
3.0 Principles for human genome collection, access, use and sharing
3.1 To affirm and value the rights of individuals and communities to make decisions
3.2 Social justice
3.3 Solidarity
3.4. Equitable access to and benefit from human genome data
3.5 Collaboration, cooperation and partnership
3.6. Stewardship of human genome data
3.7. Transparency
3.8. Accountability 

Glossary [excerpt]
Benefit-sharing refers to profit-sharing agreements, equitable access to diagnostics, therapeutics and technology transfer, as well as capacity-building and -strengthening initiatives. What constitutes a benefit (and the nature of that benefit) is both subjective and context dependent

Human genome data include but is not limited to:
–         DNA sequence(s) from the nuclear and mitochondrial genomes.
–         Transcriptome (complete set of RNA transcripts).
–         Proteome (complete set of proteins produced by an organism, from which the corresponding
–         genetic sequences can be inferred)
–         Methylome and other epigenetic modifications.

Spotlight – Revised Declaration of Helsinki adopted by the global medical community, strengthening ethical standards in clinical research involving humans

SPOTLIGHT

This month we have chosen to spotlight the recently revised Declaration of Helsinki and have provided the World Medical Association press release which positions the revision and how it was achieved below. We invite readers to review the full declaration as consent related issues are interwoven throughout, and we make special note of paragraphs 25-32 which deal with free and informed consent.

Revised Declaration of Helsinki adopted by the global medical community, strengthening ethical standards in clinical research involving humans
Press Release
World Medical Association, 21 October 2024
    The World Medical Association (WMA) has announced the adoption the 2024 Revision of the Declaration of Helsinki (DoH), the global reference for medical research involving human participants, at its General Assembly in Helsinki, Finland.

Newly inaugurated President of the WMA, Dr Ashok Philip said, “This landmark revision of the Declaration of Helsinki highlights the World Medical Association’s commitment to reinforcing the ethical principles that guide medical research involving human participants, to safeguard patient rights and to ensure the integrity of scientific studies.

“This was a mammoth revision process spanning 30 months, and the World Medical Association extends its heartfelt thanks to everyone who participated,” continued Dr Ashok Philip, President of the World Medical Association.

Under the leadership of Dr. Jack Resneck Jr., Chair of the WMA Declaration of Helsinki revision workgroup, the revision team concluded that some areas of the document had to be updated to ensure the Declaration’s continued relevance. The 2024 revision of the Declaration of Helsinki provides for increased protection for vulnerable populations, improved transparency in clinical trials, and stronger commitments to fairness and equity in research.

“Previously, the Declaration of Helsinki addressed WMA members and constituents. The new version of the Declaration says that as physicians, it’s part of our moral obligation to ensure that our patients and the participants in research are respected and treated with dignity,” said Dr Jack Resneck Jr.

“The revised Declaration of Helsinki calls on everybody involved in the research enterprise now to uphold those principles, whether they are individuals or teams or organizations across the medical research activity,” he continued.

Dr Resneck Jr. highlighted some new language in the sixth paragraph of the Declaration as important, saying, “To really address the theme of distributive and global justice, this change means that the Declaration of Helsinki calls on researchers to carefully consider how the benefits, the risks, the burdens of research are distributed.”

The substantive changes to the Declaration of Helsinki can be categorised in two areas:

  • Participant-centered inclusion, respect and protection, including recognition of participant vulnerability, calls for community engagement, pursuit of global justice, obtaining informed consent, and use of participant-centered language.
  • Research beneficence and value, including the pursuit of “individual and public health”, upholding scientific rigor and integrity, and considered distribution of benefits, risks and burdens.

More information