Biological sample donation and informed consent for neurobiobanking: Evidence from a community survey in Ghana and Nigeria
Research Article
Arti Singh, Oyedunni Arulogun, Joshua Akinyemi, Michelle Nichols, Benedict Calys-Tagoe, Babatunde Ojebuyi, Carolyn Jenkins, Reginald Obiako, Albert Akpalu, Fred Sarfo, Kolawole Wahab, Adeniyi Sunday, Lukman F. Owolabi, Muyiwa Adigun, Ibukun Afolami, Olorunyomi Olorunsogbon, Mayowa Ogunronbi, Ezinne Sylvia Melikam, Ruth Laryea, Shadrack Asibey, Wisdom Oguike, Lois Melikam, Abdullateef Sule, Musibau A. Titiloye, Isah Suleiman Yahaya, Abiodun Bello, Rajesh N. Kalaria,Ayodele Jegede, Mayowa Owolabi, Bruce Ovbiagele, Rufus Akinyemi
PLOS One, 11 August 2022
Open Access
Abstract
Introduction
Genomic research and neurobiobanking are expanding globally. Empirical evidence on the level of awareness and willingness to donate/share biological samples towards the expansion of neurobiobanking in sub-Saharan Africa is lacking.
Aims
To ascertain the awareness, perspectives and predictors regarding biological sample donation, sharing and informed consent preferences among community members in Ghana and Nigeria.
Methods
A questionnaire cross-sectional survey was conducted among randomly selected community members from seven communities in Ghana and Nigeria.
Results
Of the 1015 respondents with mean age 39.3 years (SD 19.5), about a third had heard of blood donation (37.2%, M: 42.4%, F: 32.0%, p = 0.001) and a quarter were aware of blood sample storage for research (24.5%; M: 29.7%, F: 19.4%, p = 0.151). Two out of ten were willing to donate brain after death (18.8%, M: 22.6%, F: 15.0%, p<0.001). Main reasons for unwillingness to donate brain were; to go back to God complete (46.6%) and lack of knowledge related to brain donation (32.7%). Only a third of the participants were aware of informed consent (31.7%; M: 35.9%, F: 27.5%, p<0.001). Predictors of positive attitude towards biobanking and informed consent were being married, tertiary level education, student status, and belonging to select ethnic groups.
Conclusion
There is a greater need for research attention in the area of brain banking and informed consent. Improved context-sensitive public education on neurobiobanking and informed consent, in line with the sociocultural diversities, is recommended within the African sub region.
Perspectives from a Predominantly African American Community about Biobank Research and a Biobank Consent Form
Perspectives from a Predominantly African American Community about Biobank Research and a Biobank Consent Form
Laura K. Sedig, E. Hill De Loney, Sarah B. Bailey, Kayte Spector-Bagdady, Bianca Ghita, Lydia Koh Krienke, Raymond Hutchinson
Ethics & Human Research, 8 July 2022; 44(4) pp 26-33
Abstract
Minority populations have been underrepresented in clinical trials, as well as in research biobanks that are created to conduct research with participants’ biospecimens and related medical and research data. Biobank research raises issues about informed consent and privacy and the confidentiality of participants’ personal data. Our study involved three focus groups of 10 adults each that were conducted in a medically underserved, predominantly African American community to elucidate questions and concerns regarding an institutional biobank. Transcripts from the discussion were qualitatively analyzed. Three main themes that arose from the focus groups included the importance of trust, the importance of the community in research, and suggestions to improve trust. The concerns identified in this study provide a starting point for future research to help research institutions become more trustworthy to the communities they serve.
Valid informed consent and decision-making capacity in clinical trials
Valid informed consent and decision-making capacity in clinical trials
Discussion
Vittoria Sorice, Louise Burton, Amy Neal, Jodie Bradder
Nursing Times, 1 August 2022; 118(8)
Abstract
There are ethical and legal requirements involved in the consent process for research involving human participants. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 introduced a framework outlining how choices should be made by, and on behalf of, people lacking decision-making capacity. This ensures vulnerable groups are protected from being enrolled into clinical studies without their informed consent, and gives people access to studies that are of benefit to themselves and the field of clinical research.
Promoting the Values for Surrogate Decision-making
Promoting the Values for Surrogate Decision-making
Viewpoint
David Wendler
JAMA, 23 June 2022; 328(3) pp 243-244
Excerpt
The process of making medical decisions used to be straightforward. Clinicians selected the treatment course they determined would best promote the patient’s interests. More recently, in response to increased emphasis on individual autonomy, it is the patient, in consultation with their clinicians and loved ones, who makes medical decisions. This approach respects patients who are able to make their own treatment decisions. However, it poses a challenge for the many adult patients who are unable to understand the information relevant to the decision in question, reason in light of this information and their own values, make a voluntary decision on this basis, or communicate their decision…
Inclusion of older adults and reporting of consent processes in randomized controlled trials in the emergency department: A scoping review
Inclusion of older adults and reporting of consent processes in randomized controlled trials in the emergency department: A scoping review
Lauren T Southerland, Katherine K. Benson, Austin J. Schoeffler, Margaret A. Lashutka, Soo Borson, Jason J. Bischof
Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open, May 2022
Open Access
Abstract
Objective
Conducting research in the emergency department (ED) is often complicated by patients’ acute and chronic illnesses, which can adversely affect cognition and subsequently capacity to consent for research, especially in older adults. Validated screening tools to assess capacity to consent for research exist, but neither the frequency of use nor which ones are used for ED research are known.
Methods
We conducted a scoping review using standard review techniques. Inclusion criteria included (1) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from publication years 2014–2019 that (2) enrolled participants only in the ED, (3) included patients aged 65+ years, and (4) were fully published in English. Articles were sourced from Embase and screened using Covidence.
Results
From 3130 search results, 269 studies passed title/abstract and full text screening. Average of the mean or median ages was 55.7 years (SD 14.2). The mean number of study participants was 311.9 [range 8–10,807 participants]. A few (n = 13, 4.8%) waived or had exception from informed consent. Of the 256 studies requiring consent, a fourth (26.5%, n = 68) specifically excluded patients due to impaired capacity to consent. Only 11 (4.3%) documented a formal capacity screening tool and only 13 (5.1%) reported consent by legally authorized representative (LAR).
Conclusions
Most RCTs enrolling older adults in EDs did not report assessment of capacity to consent or use of LARs. This snapshot of informed consent procedures is potentially concerning and suggests that either research consent processes for older patients and/or reporting of consent processes require improvement.
Developmental Stages and Patient Assent for Research Studies or Medical Treatment
Developmental Stages and Patient Assent for Research Studies or Medical Treatment
Rachel Y. Moo
American Academy of Pediatrics Journal Blogs, 17 August 2022
Excerpt
As a pediatrician and a clinical researcher, I am well aware of the requirements of when we need to obtain parental consent, and when a child needs to assent, meaning the child needs to agree.
In general, we talk about child assent for clinical studies, but there are times when medical treatment and enrollment in a clinical study are one and the same. For instance, most children with cancer are automatically enrolled in a clinical study, because we are still learning the best way to treat many of these cancers. And many children with cancer are alive today because of those before them who entered into these studies.
But what does it mean to get assent from a child?
This week, Pediatrics is early releasing a Pediatrics Perspectives by Gianna McMillan, a parent and bioethicist at Loyola Marymount University, entitled “The Parent’s Dilemma: Pediatric Assent in Research”.
Dr. McMillan helps us understand that assent means different things at different developmental stages. At some stages, the parent should make the decision, with or without the child’s input (again, depending on the child’s developmental stage). As the child becomes more developmentally mature, it may become appropriate for the child to make the decision, with parental agreement…
The Parent’s Dilemma: Pediatric Assent in Research
The Parent’s Dilemma: Pediatric Assent in Research
Gianna McMillan
Pediatrics Perspectives, 17 August 2022
Excerpt
Parents and their children rarely understand what it means “to consent” to participate in pediatric clinical research. This became clear during my 15 years as a patient advocate, when I facilitated hundreds of conversations about the implications of aggressive treatment of the very young and the existential crises faced by parents who made life-or death decisions for their children. In the United States, most children with cancer enter a clinical trial,1 and although parents understand enough of the scientific information to deliberate on the pros and cons of research, it is harder to grasp the subtleties of “consenting for” experimental studies, “giving permission to” the investigators, or “gaining assent from” the child. This lack of clarity leaves parents confused about the ethical weight and propriety of their decisions or unaware of any ethical significance at all…
Understanding the Effectiveness of Consent Processes and Conversations in Pediatric Surgery: A Systematic-Scoping Review
Understanding the Effectiveness of Consent Processes and Conversations in Pediatric Surgery: A Systematic-Scoping Review
Review Article
Zoe Atsaidis, Ryan Antel, Elena Guadagno, Jeffrey Wiseman, Dan Poenaru
Journal of Pediatric Surgery, 11 August 2022
Abstract
Background
The consent conversation in pediatric surgery is an essential part of pre-operative care which, when inadequate, can lead to significant adverse consequences for the child, parents, surgeon, other healthcare workers and the healthcare system. We reviewed the published literature on what key stakeholders perceive are the components of effective and ineffective consenting processes in pediatric surgery.
Methods
A medical librarian searched seven databases to retrieve articles looking at the informed consenting process in surgical care for the pediatric population. Two independent reviewers screened all publications and categorized them by stakeholder perspectives (patient/family, surgical team, other healthcare team, and hospital administration or policy maker). General study characteristics, interventions to improve consent and features of effective and ineffective consent conversations were extracted.
Results
5079 titles and abstracts were screened, resulting in 88 full-text studies and 43 articles included in the final review. Most publications (51%) discussed informed consent only from the patient/family perspective, while 21% added surgeon’s perspective. No study approached the consenting process from the perspective of all stakeholder groups. Effective consent components identified included use of multimedia, presence of multiple conversations prior to surgery, and individualized communication catered to unique family knowledge and needs. In contrast, ineffective conversations did not include a clear assessment of parental understanding, delivered too much information, and did not address parental anxiety.
Conclusions
The literature on the consenting process in pediatric surgery is narrow in stakeholder perspectives. Our findings highlight gaps in the literature and opportunities to improve the informed consent processes prior to pediatric surgery.
The Role of Formal Policy to Promote Informed Consent of Psychotropic Medications for Youth in Child Welfare Custody: A National Examination
The Role of Formal Policy to Promote Informed Consent of Psychotropic Medications for Youth in Child Welfare Custody: A National Examination
Original Article
Thomas I. Mackie, Ana J. Schaefer, John S. Palatucci, Laurel K. Leslie, Stephen Crystal, Michael Gusmano, Hannah E. Karpman
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 6 August 2022
Open Access
Abstract
Active participation of youth and surrogate decision-makers in providing informed consent and assent for mental health treatment is critical. However, the procedural elements of an informed consent process, particularly for youth in child welfare custody, are not well defined. Given calls for psychotropic medication oversight for youth in child welfare custody, this study proposes a taxonomy for the procedural elements of informed consent policies based upon formal and informal child welfare policies and then examines whether enacted state formal policies across the United States endorsed these elements. A sequential multi-method study design included: (1) semi-structured interviews with key informants (n = 58) primarily from state child welfare agencies to identify a taxonomy of procedural elements for informed consent of psychotropic medications and then (2) a legislative review of the 50 states and D.C. to characterize whether formal policies endorsed each procedural element through February 2022. Key informants reported five procedural elements in policy, including how to: (1) gather social and medical history, (2) prescribe the medication, (3) authorize its use through consent and youth assent, (4) notify relevant stakeholders, and (5) routinely review the consenting decision. Twenty-three states endorsed relevant legislation; however, only two states specified all five procedural elements. Additionally, the content of a procedural element, when included, varied substantively across policies. Further research and expert consensus are needed to set best practices and guide policymakers in setting policies to advance transparency and accountability for informed consent of mental health treatment among youth in child welfare custody.
Ethical issues concerning the use of commercially available wearables in children: Informed consent, living in the spotlight, and the right to an open future
Ethical issues concerning the use of commercially available wearables in children: Informed consent, living in the spotlight, and the right to an open future
Andrie G. Panayiotou, Evangelos D. Protopapadakis
European Journal of Bioethics, July 2022; 13(25)
Open Access
Summary
Wearable and mobile technology has advanced in leaps and bounds in the last decade with technological advances creating a role from enhancing healthy living to monitoring and treating disease. However, the discussion about the ethical use of such commercial technology in the community, especially in minors, is lacking behind. In this paper, we first summarize the major ethical concerns that arise from the usage of commercially available wearable technology in children, with a focus on smart watches, highlighting issues around the consent process, mitigation of risk and potential confidentiality and privacy issues, as well as the potential for therapeutic misconceptions when used without medical advice. Then through a relevant thought experiment we move on to outline some further ethical concerns that are connected to the use of wearables by minors, to wit the issue of informed consent in the case of minors, forcing them to live in the spotlight, and compromising their right to an open future. We conclude with the view that mitigating potential pitfalls and enhancing the benefits of wearable technology especially for minors requires brave and comprehensive moral debates.