Capacity to consent to research participation in adults with metastatic cancer: comparisons of brain metastasis, non-CNS metastasis, and healthy controls.
cancer
consent capacity
informed consent
metastasis
research participation
Journal
Neuro-oncology practice
ISSN: 2054-2577
Titre abrégé: Neurooncol Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101640528
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2020
Jul 2020
Historique:
entrez:
9
8
2020
pubmed:
9
8
2020
medline:
9
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate the ability of individuals with metastatic cancer to provide informed consent to research participation, we used a structured vignette-based interview to measure 4 consenting standards across 3 participant groups. Participants included 61 individuals diagnosed with brain metastasis, 41 individuals diagnosed with non-CNS metastasis, and 17 cognitively intact healthy controls. All groups were evaluated using the Capacity to Consent to Research Instrument (CCRI), a performance-based measure of research consent capacity. The ability to provide informed consent to participate in research was evaluated across 4 consent standards: Results revealed that the brain metastasis group performed significantly lower than healthy controls on the consent standard of Our findings, using a performance-based assessment, are consistent with other research indicating that the research consent process may be overly cumbersome and confusing. This, in turn, may lead to research consent impairment not only in patient groups but also in some healthy adults with intact cognitive ability.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To evaluate the ability of individuals with metastatic cancer to provide informed consent to research participation, we used a structured vignette-based interview to measure 4 consenting standards across 3 participant groups.
METHODS
METHODS
Participants included 61 individuals diagnosed with brain metastasis, 41 individuals diagnosed with non-CNS metastasis, and 17 cognitively intact healthy controls. All groups were evaluated using the Capacity to Consent to Research Instrument (CCRI), a performance-based measure of research consent capacity. The ability to provide informed consent to participate in research was evaluated across 4 consent standards:
RESULTS
RESULTS
Results revealed that the brain metastasis group performed significantly lower than healthy controls on the consent standard of
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings, using a performance-based assessment, are consistent with other research indicating that the research consent process may be overly cumbersome and confusing. This, in turn, may lead to research consent impairment not only in patient groups but also in some healthy adults with intact cognitive ability.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32765894
doi: 10.1093/nop/npaa008
pii: npaa008
pmc: PMC7393275
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
439-445Subventions
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : KL2 TR000166
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : R25 CA076023
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jan 1;22(1):157-65
pubmed: 14701778
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;64(8):966-74
pubmed: 17679641
Clin Trials. 2019 Jun;16(3):283-289
pubmed: 30818994
Am J Psychiatry. 1998 Nov;155(11):1649-50
pubmed: 9812160
Behav Sci Law. 2006;24(4):535-46
pubmed: 16883621
Cancer. 2004 Jun 1;100(11):2292-9
pubmed: 15160331
Neurology. 2005 Aug 9;65(3):483-5
pubmed: 16087924
Neurology. 2009 Dec 15;73(24):2086-92
pubmed: 20018637
Oncologist. 2005 Sep;10(8):636-41
pubmed: 16177288
J Neurooncol. 2014 Oct;120(1):179-85
pubmed: 25035099
Handb Clin Neurol. 2018;149:155-165
pubmed: 29307352
Cancer Treat Rev. 2013 May;39(3):297-304
pubmed: 23219452
Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Apr;21(2):207-14
pubmed: 17391294
Nat Rev Cancer. 2002 Aug;2(8):563-72
pubmed: 12154349
Handb Clin Neurol. 2016;138:297-309
pubmed: 27637965
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2014 Feb;26(1):102-13
pubmed: 24716504
Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Mar;8(3):246-52
pubmed: 11229946
N Engl J Med. 1988 Dec 22;319(25):1635-8
pubmed: 3200278
J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2008 May;14(3):436-45
pubmed: 18419842
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 May 1;47(2):291-8
pubmed: 10802351
Support Care Cancer. 2019 Sep;27(9):3253-3279
pubmed: 31147780
Lancet. 2001 Nov 24;358(9295):1772-7
pubmed: 11734235
Innov Clin Neurosci. 2012 May;9(5-6):47-51
pubmed: 22808449
Am J Surg. 2009 Sep;198(3):420-35
pubmed: 19716887
Psychooncology. 2015 Nov;24(11):1448-55
pubmed: 25613039
BMC Med Ethics. 2013 Jul 23;14:28
pubmed: 23879694
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Aug 20;28(24):3844-50
pubmed: 20644102
Cancer. 2009 Apr 15;115(8):1776-83
pubmed: 19224550
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Jul;62(7):726-33
pubmed: 15997013
IRB. 2008 Jan-Feb;30(1):6-14
pubmed: 18306954