Volume 19, Issue 5, May 2019, Page 34-36.

Despite their vulnerability, adolescents are often excluded from health research due to ethical concerns about research with minors, especially in low-income regions like Sub-Saharan Africa. We enrolled adolescent girls aged 15–17 years and caregivers of girls of the same age. Using a 25-question Comprehension Score Sheet, we applied a quantitative approach to compare the comprehension of informed consent of 33 adolescent girls and 41 caregivers of adolescent girls aged 15–17 years. The assessments were audio-recorded and reviewed for quality check. The (...) results showed that adolescent girls were significantly better than caregivers in comprehending informed consent information overall and specifically on study procedures, voluntarism and study purpose. This suggests that adolescents can understand informed consent information at the same level as or better than caregivers who are entrusted with providing permission for adolescents to participate in research. (shrink)

There is substantial published evidence showing that countless people enroll each year in ethically deficient clinical trials. Many of the trials are problematic because the quality of the science used to justify their launch may not be sufficiently vetted while many other trials may lack requisite social value. This poses the question: why do people volunteer for them? The answer resides in large part in the fact that informed consent practices have historically masked, rather than disclosed, the information that would (...) alert research candidates to the ethically problematic nature of the trials. The “reasonable person” and “key information” provisions in the revised US Common Rule create the opportunity to correct this historical shortcoming. Two sources are employed to shed light on what the “key information” is that should be disclosed to a “reasonable person”: the original disclosure aims of the Nuremberg Code, as well as an extensive body of meta-research evidence. Those sources jointly support a range of new disclosures in the informed consent process that would unmask the heretofore undisclosed information. The resulting proposed new disclosures pertain to the overall success prospects of clinical trials, the quality of the prior research that both forms the basis of clinical trials and informs assessment of their risks and benefits, the potential social value of clinical trials, and the commercial purposes of clinical trials. (shrink)

Volume 19, Issue 5, May 2019, Page 36-38.

Millum and Bromwich provide a thorough and thoughtful analysis of what is required for sufficient informed consent, offering distinct conceptualizations of the ethical requirements of disclo...