Erosion of informed consent in U.S. research. (26th November 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Shepherd, Lois; Macklin, Ruth
• Is Part Of: Bioethics. Volume 33:Number 1(2019)
• Page Start: 4
• Page End: 12
• Publication Date: 2018-11-26
• Subjects: comparative effectiveness studies -- informed consent -- organ transplantation research -- research subjects; Bioethics -- Periodicals; 174.957
• DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12532
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0269-9702

Abstract

Abstract: This paper evaluates four recent randomized clinical trials in which the informed consent of participants was either not sought at all, or else was conducted with critical information missing from the consent documents. As these studies have been taking place, various proposals to conduct randomized clinical trials without consent have been appearing in the medical literature. Some of the explanations offered for why it is appropriate to bypass consent or disclosure requirements appear to represent a fundamental misunderstanding of applicable government regulations and even the research enterprise. Others are the result of conceptual disagreements about the importance and application of traditional research ethics norms to 'comparative effectiveness research' and modern research environments. Common among these explanations, however, is a failure to appreciate when a research intervention, rather than merely an observation or review of data, is taking place. Review committees and investigators are failing to see, or choosing to ignore, interventions in the lives of research subjects. When these studies have come to light, government agencies with oversight authority have done little or backed down. Prestigious medical journals have published research results knowing that the required consent was not obtained, or they have stood by the published studies even after the inadequacy of consent is discovered. This article critically examines this erosion of consent in theory and practice and calls for restoring the requirement of informed consent to its proper place as a priority in human subjects research.